Calendario y Anuncios: el día a día del curso

Este temario/calendario está concebido como un proyecto de curso. Como tal, puede acoger modificaciones que surjan como respuesta a necesidades académicas del grupo, a novedades en la disciplina de relevancia para el contenido del curso, o a situaciones inesperadas fuera de nuestro control [huracanes, apagones masivos, cambios de modalidad, etc.]. Como CALENDARIO, recoge el día a día del curso: todos los detalles sobre las lecturas y las asignaciones, las advertencias y recomendaciones, las informaciones importantes y los cambios coyunturales -sesión por sesión. Se actualizará continuamente de acuerdo con las necesidades que surjan. Por lo tanto, deben consultarlo frecuentemente. De haber modificaciones de último minuto, éstas se añadirán en color púrpura en la página y, de ser algo de mayor envergadura, se anunciarán también a través del correo electrónico. Por esta razón, acostúmbrense a dar un vistazo a la página y a cotejar su correo en la hora antes de entrar a clase.

¡OJO! TODOS LOS DOCUMENTOS QUE SE UTILIZARÁN EN ESTE CURSO SE ENCUENTRAN EN LAS CUATRO SUB-PÁGINAS DEL CURSO EN ENLACES O EN LOS ARCHIVOS AL PIE DE ESTAS PÁGINAS.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16 DE AGOSTO - SESIÓN 1

I. PRIMERA PARTE DE LA CLASE: INTRODUCCIÓN GENERAL AL CURSO.

Sesión organizativa. Mapa del curso. Presentación del sílabo y de los documentos (de base y de apoyo) en la página web del curso [en Google.sites]. Presentación y explicación del temario general.
Principios rectores, conceptos medulares, premisas, definiciones terminológicas y ejes de clasificación/orientación que configuran la organización y el desarrollo del curso.
Pre-concepciones sobre la literatura, los estudios literarios, la teoría, la crítica e interpretación, el curso. Intereses, expectativas y necesidades académicas estudiantiles.

TEMA (1): PREMISAS / DEFINICIONES / DISTINCIONES DE BASE. EXPLICACIONES.

(1) PARA EL CONCEPTO DE LITERATURA: La literatura/el discurso literario como acto de comunicación. *Esquema de la situación de comunicación y las funciones del lenguaje según Roman Jakobson.

JAKOBSON'S COMMUNICATION MODEL

context: referential function

--------------

message: poetic function

addresser: emotive function ---------------------------------------> addressee: connative function

contact: phatic function

----------------------

code: metalinguistic function

___________________________________________________________________________

Functions (italicized phrases)

The context or referential function is what is being spoken of, what is being referred to.

The poetic function is the focus on the message (the use of the medium) for its own sake. The associations (equivalence, similarity and dissimilarity, synonymity and antonymity); the repetitions of sound values, stresses, accents; the word and phrase boundaries and relationships (e.g. elided vs end-stopped words): as these are combined in sequence.

The emotive or expressive function of language refers to the attitude of the addresser towards that of which (or to whom) he speaks: through emphasis, intonation, loudness, pace, etc.

The phatic function is the use of language to keep people in contact with each other, the maintenance of social relationships.

The metalinguistic function is that use of language by which people check out with each other whether they are 'on the same page', using the same codes in the same contexts.

The connative function refers to those aspects of language which aim to create a certain response in the addressee.

Prepared by John Lye as a synopsis of part of Roman Jakobson's "Linguistics and Poetics" (1958)

-------------------------------------------------------------

(2) PARA LOS CONCEPTOS DE TEORÍA Y CRÍTICA LITERARIAS: La teoría/crítica literaria como reflexión, enfoque, énfasis, ángulo de visión (i.e. maneras de ver, maneras de construir significados), herramienta, ideología. *Esquema de clasificación de la teoría/crítica literaria establecida por M.H. Abrams. En Abrams, M. H. The mirror and the lamp: Romantic theory and the critical tradition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1953.

the mirror and the lamp: use of metaphoric models in the reading, writing and interpretation of literature; the changing metaphors to describe the human mind: the mirror as reflection of the world, the lamp as light/illumination [power of the imagination, vision] on the world:

"In the introduction to The Mirror and the Lamp (1953), Abrams constructs a taxonomic model [=concerned with the classification of things] encompassing, he suggests, all possible forms of literary theory. He identifies four elements that constitute the natural environment in which literature is produced and read: an author, a reader, a shared world, and a text. Abrams argues that all literary theories can be classified by the relative emphasis they place on one of these four elements.

(a) expressive theories emphasize the author;

(b) rhetorical or “pragmatic” theories emphasize effects on readers;

(d) “objective” theories emphasize the formal organization of the literary work.

As simple as this model is, Abrams makes a convincing case, documented in detail, that these four elements can effectively distinguish literary theories from the time of Plato and Aristotle up through the mid-twentieth century. Applying this model to his particular subject in The Mirror and the Lamp, Abrams argues that the transformations of aesthetic theory between the neo-classical and Romantic periods can best be described as a shift from mimetic to expressive theories.”

adapted from Blackwell’s Encyclopedia of Literary and Cultural Theory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) PARA LA NOCIÓN DE DISCIPLINA ACADÉMICA que se va a estar utilizando, ver:

Tony Becher. "Las disciplinas académicas." en Tribus y territorios académicos: la indagación intelectual y las culturas de las disciplinas. Barcelona: Editorial Gedisa, 1989: 37-57.

En su libro: Tribus y territorios académicos. La indagación intelectual y las culturas de las disciplinas (Barcelona: Gedisa Educación, 2002), Tony Becher analiza trece (13) “disciplinas” o “programas” en diez universidades británicas (Cambridge, entre ellas), y en dos universidades norteamericanas: Universidad de California (en sus sedes de Berkeley, Santa Bárbara, Los Ángeles y San Francisco) y la Universidad de Stanford. Su tesis central se esbozó a partir del estudio de la relación “que existe entre ciertas personas y ciertas ideas." En palabras de Tony Becher, "Lo que aquí propongo, e intentaré corroborar, es que las formas de organización de la vida profesional de los grupos particulares de académicos están íntimamente relacionadas con las tareas intelectuales que desempeñan. (…).” (p. 16)

--------------------------------

González Ochoa C. “Las disciplinas académicas.” Elementos 114 (2019) 11-18.

El término “disciplina académica” (…) es un término técnico que se usa para nombrar la organización del aprendizaje y la producción sistemática de nuevos conocimientos. Una lista general de sus características incluiría: 1) las disciplinas tienen un objeto particular de investigación (leyes, sociedad, política), aunque este objeto puede ser compartido con otra disciplina; 2) las disciplinas tienen un cuerpo de conocimientos especializado acumulado que se refiere a su objeto de investigación, que es específico a ellas y que generalmente no se comparte con otra; 3) las disciplinas poseen teorías y conceptos que pueden organizar el conocimiento acumulado; 4) las disciplinas usan terminologías específicas o un lenguaje técnico específico ajustado a su objeto; 5) las disciplinas han desarrollado métodos específicos de investigación con sus requerimientos específicos; y de manera más importante, 6) las disciplinas deben tener alguna manifestación institucional en la forma de temas de estudio que se enseñan en universidades, departamentos académicos y asociaciones profesionales conectadas a ellas. Solo a través de la institucionalización las disciplinas son capaces de reproducirse de una generación a la siguiente por medio de una preparación educativa específica. (Krishnan 2009, 9-10)

Las disciplinas académicas pueden pensarse en términos de las prácticas culturales que crean y mantienen; estas prácticas estarían unidas a otras más amplias, y desde esta perspectiva se puede concluir que las disciplinas son una forma de segmentación social; que sus practicantes pertenecen a diferentes tribus académicas que habitan y defienden diferentes territorios del conocimiento, y se distinguen por medio de las prácticas culturales y valores específicos creados por ellos mismos. Cada disciplina entonces se podría considerar como parte de agrupaciones culturales mayores (academias, etc.), como un microcosmos cultural que se manifiesta en la existencia de departamentos académicos disciplinarios y en asociaciones.

Las tribus académicas “definen su propia identidad y defienden su propio territorio intelectual empleando diversos mecanismos orientados a excluir a los inmigrantes ilegales”. (Becher 2001, 43) [INCLUSIÓN/EXCLUSIÓN]

-------------------------------------

Otras referencias:

***Becher, T. “The significance of disciplinary difference.” Studies in Higher Education, Jun94, Vol. 19 Issue 2:151, 2 charts. https://blogs.helsinki.fi/ypeda-kriittinenmassa/files/2008/10/becher_1994.pdf

Krishnan A. (2009) "What are Academic Disciplines? Some observations on the Disciplinarity vs. Interdisciplinarity debate," NCRM Working Paper Series, University of Southampton: ESRC National Centre for Research Methods.

Manathunga, C. and Brew, A. (2012) “Beyond Tribes and Territories: New Metaphors for New Times.” In P. Trowler, M. Saunders and R. Bamber (Eds) (2012).Tribes and territories in the 21st-century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education. London: Routledge, 44-56.

Trowler, P. (2008a) “Beyond Epistemological Essentialism: Academic Tribes in the 21st Century.” In Kreber, C. (ed) The University and its Disciplines:Teaching and learning within and beyond disciplinary boundaries. London: Routledge

Trowler, P. (2008b) Cultures and Change in Higher Education: Theories and Practices. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Trowler, P., Saunders, M. and Bamber, R. (Eds) (2012).Tribes and territories in the 21st-century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education. London: Routledge.

----------------------------------------

Academic disciplines defined as:

"Reservoirs of knowledge resources shaping regularised behavioural practices, sets of discourses, ways of thinking, procedures, emotional responses and motivations. These provide structured dispositions for disciplinary practitioners who reshape them in different practice clusters into localised repertoires. While alternative recurrent practices may be in competition within a single discipline, there is common background knowledge about key figures, conflicts and achievements. Disciplines take organisational form, have internal hierarchies and bestow power differentially, conferring advantage and disadvantage. "(Trowler, Saunders and Bamber (eds.) 2012, p. 9)

----------------------------------------

(4) TEORÍA Y ESTÉTICA DE LA RECEPCIÓN: Las diversas teorías/estéticas de la recepción. Los conceptos de competencia linguístico-comunicativa/competencia de lectura/competencia narrativa, horizonte de expectativas y comunidades de interpretación. Hans Robert Jauss, Wolfgang Iser, Stanley Fish.

Literary Theory and Criticism

ENGLISH LITERATURE, LITERARY THEORY AND CRITICISM, LINGUISTICS, FILM THEORY, EBOOKS, UGC NET JRF PREPARATION, NOVEL ANALYSIS, SCHOLARLY ARTICLES.

*competencia comunicativa -> competencia de lectura:

The term ‘communicative competence’ was coined by Hymes (1967), in reaction to Chomsky's notion of grammatical ‘competence,’ arguing against his search for an understanding of universals of language knowledge, and in favor of an ethnography of communication account which focuses on the full variety of knowledge of how to produce and interpret language used communicatively across different groups and cultures. When applied to the reading process, it becomes "reading competence".

*horizonte de expectativas:

Horizon of expectations is a term fundamental to German academic Hans Robert Jauss's reception theory. Specifically, it is the structure by which a person comprehends, decodes and appraises any text based on cultural codes and conventions particular to their time in history. These horizons are therefore historically flexible meanings. According to Jauss, the reader approaches a text armed with the knowledge and experience gained from interactions with other texts. These earlier texts arouse familiarity for the reader based on expectations and rules of genre and style (=norms, conventions).

"Conceptualized by Hans Robert Jauss in his Toward an Aesthetic of Reception in the late 1960s, Reception Theory refers to a historical application of the Reader Response theory, emphasizing altering interpretive and evaluative responses of generations of readers to a text. It focuses on the scope for negotiation and opposition on the part of the general public, over a period of time in history, as they interpret the meanings of a text based on their respective cultural background and life experiences. A reader’s response to a text is the joint product of the reader’s own horizon of expectations and the confirmations, disappointments, refutations and reformulations of these expectations. Since the linguistic and aesthetic expectation of readers change over the course of time, and since later readers and critics have access to the text as well as its criticisms, there develops an evolving historical tradition of interpretations and evaluations of a given literary work. Jauss refers to this tradition as a continuous dialectic between the text and the horizon of successive readers; the literary text, in itself, possesses no inherent meaning or value."

*comunidades de interpretación:

"Unlike Wolfgang Iser who analyses individual acts of reading, Stanley Fish situates the reading process within a broader institutional perspective. In Is There a Text in the Class? (1980), Fish proposes that competent readers form part of “interpretive communities”, consisting of members who share “interpretive strategies” or “set of community assumptions” of reading a text so as to write meaning into the text. He also proposed that each communal strategy in effect “creates” all the seemingly objective features of the text, as well as “intentions, speakers and authors” that readers may infer from the text. Hence the validity of any text depends on the assumptions and strategies that the readers may share with other members of a particular interpretive community.

He claims that all values and meanings of a text are relative to the concepts or schemes of a particular interpretive community and that, such conceptual schemes are “incommensurable” in that there is no standpoint outside of any interpretive community for translating the discourse of one community to another, or for mediating between them. Fish suggests that interpretation of a literary text is characterised not by fixed meanings in a linguistic system, but by practices and assumptions of an institution or a community, where meanings are derived from a context rather than from their position in the linguistic system. Thus, it is the context that imparts meaning to an utterance, and it is impossible to separate any utterance from its context."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***competencia narrativa:

ChatGPT, 7 de junio de 2023:

Narrative competence refers to the ability to understand, create, and effectively communicate narratives or stories. It involves a range of skills and knowledge related to storytelling, including comprehension, interpretation, analysis, and expression. Narrative competence goes beyond mere literacy and encompasses a deeper understanding of the structural, thematic, and emotional elements that make up narratives.

At its core, narrative competence involves the capacity to comprehend and engage with narratives in various forms, such as literature, film, theater, oral traditions, and even personal anecdotes. It requires understanding the elements of a narrative, such as plot, characters, setting, and themes, and being able to recognize and interpret the relationships between these elements.

Additionally, narrative competence entails the ability to critically analyze and evaluate narratives. This includes recognizing different narrative techniques, understanding narrative perspectives, and discerning underlying messages or ideologies embedded within a story. A person with narrative competence can identify narrative devices like foreshadowing, symbolism, or narrative structure, and can interpret their significance.

Furthermore, narrative competence involves the skill to construct and express narratives effectively. This encompasses the capacity to develop coherent storylines, create engaging characters, establish appropriate settings, and convey emotions and ideas through language. It also includes understanding audience and context to adapt storytelling techniques accordingly.

Narrative competence has various practical applications across different domains. In education, it plays a crucial role in literacy development, as well as in fostering critical thinking and empathy. In the business world, narrative competence is valuable for effective communication, marketing, and creating compelling brand stories. In the realm of entertainment and media, it is essential for crafting engaging narratives that resonate with audiences.

Developing narrative competence requires exposure to a wide range of narratives, including both traditional and contemporary forms. Reading books, watching movies, attending live performances, and engaging in discussions about narratives can all contribute to the development of narrative competence. Additionally, active participation in creating and sharing stories through writing, public speaking, or other creative outlets can enhance narrative skills.

In summary, narrative competence is the ability to understand, create, and communicate narratives effectively. It encompasses skills related to comprehension, interpretation, analysis, and expression, and has practical applications across multiple domains. Developing narrative competence involves exposure to diverse narratives and active engagement with storytelling techniques.

-----------------------------------------------------

(5) Dos entradas/direcciones para el estudio de la literatura/del discurso literario: la poética y la hermenéutica. Para comprender el uso de los términos en este binomio: proyecto de investigación poético vs proyecto de investigación hermenéutico, según Jonathan Culler.

*Las definiciones de Jonathan Culler.

"Here there is a basic distinction, too often neglected in literary studies, between two kinds of projects:

(1) one, modeled on linguistics, takes meanings as what have to be accounted for and tries to work out how they are possible.

(2) The other, by contrast, starts with forms and seeks to interpret them, to tell us what they really mean.

In literary studies, this is a contrast between poetics and hermeneutics. Poetics starts with attested meanings or effects and asks how they are achieved. [...] Hermeneutics, on the other hand, starts with texts and asks what they mean, seeking to discover new and better interpretations. [...]"

J. Culler. “Language, meaning and interpretation.” Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, 61.

-------------

La poética (traducida como "Poetics") como se concibe tradicionalmente a partir de Aristóteles:

"Traditionally, the term poetics has been interpreted as an inquiry into the laws and principles that underlie a verbal work of art and has often carried normative and prescriptive connotations. It first appears in the form of systematic inquiry around 350 BC in Aristotle’s work Poetics and has since exercised enormous influence on attempts to define the structural and functional principles of works of art predominantly, but not exclusively, in the verbal medium."

The Chicago School of Media Theory.

--------------------------------------

***(6) La literatura/el discurso literario como construcción (de sentido) y sistema de representación (mediación).

La literatura/la narración como construcción [vs como objeto estético]. Análisis/Interpretación vs Contemplación/Apreciación. Sentido vs Belleza.]. La literatura/el discurso literario como sistema de representación. Las narratologías textualistas. Los elementos constitutivos del sistema. Cuestiones de poética. "Literature as verbal sense-making in a particular way".

*Uso poético del lenguaje (=enfocado en sí mismo) vs uso ordinario del lenguaje (=como medio de comunicación) - según el formalismo ruso y las funciones del lenguaje de Roman Jakobson..

*Las narratologías clásica y post-clásica I. ¿Cómo está constituido un texto narrativo? (=How is a narrative text put together?) El concepto de mediación narrativa. Las noción de mediación narrativa (=narrador y focalizador o punto de vista). Mediacy (=indirect) vs Immediacy (=direct). Consideraciones de temporalidad y causalidad (=consecutividad/consecuencia). El modelo de Franz Stanzel (el círculo tipológico/the typological circle) vs el modelo de Gérard Genette.

"Mediacy and narrative mediation." https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/28.html

------------------------------------------

***(7) La literatura/el discurso literario como sistema de expresión/enunciación, como retórica.

Las narratologías contextualistas: ideologías, género, clase, etnia, afectividad, etc. Las narratologías retóricas. Juicios/Sistemas de valor: Valor narrativo/descriptivo (¿Cómo está constituido el texto?) VS valor estético/evaluativo (¿El texto es bueno/bello? ¿Hasta qué punto? ¿A partir de qué criterios, de qué estándares?) VS valor político/ético (¿El texto es bueno para quién?¿El texto está al servicio de los intereses de quién?) VS valor cognitivo (¿Qué nos enseña el texto, qué aprendemos del texto?) VS valor afectivo (¿Qué nos hace sentir el texto? =las expectativas a partir de la experiencia personal <ética y emocional> del lector).

*"Textuality vs experientiality, textuality vs storytelling vs fictionality vs "possible worlds" (mundos posibles) vs prototypes".

------------------------------------------

(8) Concepciones del texto y de la textualidad. Ver el artículo:

Peter Trifonas. "Conceptions of Text and Textuality: Critical Perspectives in Literary Theory from Structuralism to Poststructuralism." Interchange, Vol. 24/4 (1993): 381-395.

ABSTRACT: In attempting to explain the relationship between reader and text, theorists have alternated focus upon either the reader or the text, to clarify and validate perspectives on epistemological problems of hermeneutics-- or interpretation-- as the logical culmination of the reading act. Beyond facilitating comprehension, the essence of teaching reading in language education is the determination of cross-cultural aspects of communication and language competence, wherein the heart of hermeneutics lies.Therefore, this paper surveys a diverse field of cross-disciplinary research incorporating both philosophical and empirical methodology in literary theory, semiotics, reading theory, philosophy, cognitive psychology, and linguistics, in order to more clearly define an approach to investigation of hermeneutics in relation to the reading act and literature (or written text).

--------------------------------------

(9) De la teoría literaria al método crítico. Ver el artículo:

Rita Felski. "From Literary Theory to Critical Method." Profession (2008): 108-116.

***Este artículo es valioso para entender la relación entre teoría literaria contemporánea y método crítico/interpretativo literario. Ha servido de base para la manera en que se concibe y organiza nuestro curso.

------------------------------------

(10) Humanismo liberal (razón y ciencia, universalismo, meta-relatos, explicaciones coherentes y abarcadoras/totalizantes, principio de legitimidad del saber, *humanidad compartida e individualismo, valores de la Ilustración vs fe/superstición vs estructuralismo, post-modernismo, post-estructuralismo, etc.

Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory. An introduction to literary and cultural theory. Manchester & New York: Manchester U. Press/St. Martin's Press, 1995, 2002, 2009.

"The term 'liberal humanism' became current in the 1970s, as a shorthand (and mainly hostile) way of referring to the kind of criticism which held sway before 'theory'. The word 'liberal' in this formulation roughly means not politically radical, and hence generally evasive and non-committal on political issues. 'Humanism' implies something similar; it suggests a range of negative attributes, such as 'non-Marxist' and 'non-feminist', and 'non-theoretical'. There is also the implication that liberal humanists believe in 'human nature' as something fixed and constant which great literature expresses. Liberal humanists did not (and do not, as a rule) use this name of themselves, but, says an influential school of thought, if you practise literary criticism and do not call yourself a Marxist critic, or a structuralist, or a stylistician, or some such, then you are probably a liberal humanist, whether or not you admit or recognise this." (p.12)

https://habib.camden.rutgers.edu/publications/essays/the-myth-of-liberal-humanism/

M.A. Rafey Habib. “The Myth of Liberal Humanism.” 2021. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.

"But what is liberal humanism? This is not so easy to answer. In the history of modern thought, liberal humanism has comprised the mainstream philosophies of the bourgeois Enlightenment, such as rationalism, empiricism and utilitarianism. The economic principles of bourgeois ideology, such as rationality, laissez-faire and free competition, have been expressed by the classical economists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo. The political principles of democracy, individual rights, and constitutional government were expressed by figures such as Rousseau, John Locke and Thomas Paine. The imperial ideology and mission – not only to conquer other parts of the world for their economic resources but to submit them also to the civilizing effects of Western literature and culture – were expressed by figures such as Thomas Babington Macaulay, and many politicians, philosophers and scientists. All of these tendencies – as refracted through the philosophy of Kant – achieve a kind of synthesis in the philosophy of Hegel, the supreme expression of bourgeois thought, built on the philosophical principles of the Protestant Reformation and the French Revolution, uniting the divergent modes of Enlightenment thought such as rationalism and empiricism, and combining these with a Romantic emphasis on totality and the unity of subject and object, all integrated into a notion of historical progress. It was Hegel who most articulately expressed the notion of the relatedness of all concepts and entities, of human identity as a reciprocal and social phenomenon, of the world as a social and historical human construction, of identity as intrinsically constituted by diversity, of language as a system of human perception, and of the very idea of otherness or alterity as it informs much modern thought."

-------------------------------------------

(11) El uso generalizado en los medios de comunicación del término narrativa/narrative. Lo mismo sucede con los términos "story" y "conversation".

http://richardgilbert.me/the-invasion-of-narrative/ Richard Gilbert: “Rampant Use of the Term ‘narrative’”. Why is everyone using the term 'narrative' all of a sudden?

Gilbert quotes Gerald Grow, retired Shakespeare Scholar:

“I am puzzled by what looks like a tendency to reduce events in the world that can mean life or death (e.g., men with guns, big storm, food shortage, job lost, clash of cultures, core beliefs) to the terms of literary criticism (narrative, story, margin). In many cases, I would expect some term like theory, explanation, understanding, picture, biography, motive, version, alibi, etc.

What is going on? What does it mean to conflate so many useful and content-filled distinctions into the vague theoretical term “narrative”? Calling so many types of discourse “narratives” is rather like referring to both wood pulp and voters as “biomass.” Where did this reductionistic use of the term “narrative” come from? Who is promoting it? Who benefits from it? Why do so many articulate, educated people so easily slip into using it when they are trying explain something? To question this devil in its own terminology: What is lost when the term “narrative” colonizes public discourse?”

---------------------

Richard Gilbert himself: “For me, “narrative” is obviously such a useful word because it draws attention to the fact that the truth is not just complex or dependent on where one sits but much more problematic.”

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/338764/usage-and-meaning-of-the-term-narrative/338770

I have the impression that the term narrative, which traditionally refers to the literary sense of:

-the art, technique, or process of narrating, or of telling a story: Somerset Maugham was a master of narrative.- Origin: a tale, story," 1560s, from Middle French narrative. (Dictionary.com)

is more and more frequently used with the modern/contemporary connotations which I could find clearly defined only in the AHD:

-A presentation of real-world events that connects them in a storylike way:

"There has been less of a coherent, connected media narrative and more of a kind of episodic focus on events, controversies and gaffes" (Mark Jurkowitz).

-An explanation or interpretation of events in accordance with a particular theory, ideology, or point of view:

for example, "the competing narratives of capitalism and Marxism." This use started in the late ‘80s.

*** A current example:

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-coronavirus-and-the-ruptured-narrative-of-campus-life

“The Coronavirus and the ruptured narrative of campus life". By Dan Chiasson. March 12, 2020.

--------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. SEGUNDA PARTE DE LA CLASE: COMPONENTE DE INVESTIGACIÓN.

TEMA (2):COMPONENTE DE INVESTIGACIÓN I:

A. Introducción a la redacción de reseñas (en un sentido amplio) como parte del componente de investigación. Base también para la lectura crítico-analítica de artículos, el repaso de la literatura y la bibliografía anotada/comentada en monografías/ensayos argumentativos.

B. Actividad de análisis en clase: análisis de dos reseñas.

***EXPLICACIÓN PRELIMINAR:

En casi todas las definiciones de lo que se entiende por reseña (o análisis/comentario) de artículos (o de libros) suelen identificarse cuatro componentes definitorios recurrentes aunque la distribución proporcional entre ellos varía de acuerdo con la intención/propósito del que la escribe o del contexto en el que se escribe. Estos componentes también se toman en consideración en el repaso de la literatura y en las bibliografías anotadas/comentadas de un proyecto de investigación.

¡OJO! En todos estos casos/ejercicios se trata de comprender las ideas y los argumentos de otros, analizarlos y presentarlos en sus propios términos antes de someterlos a las ideas o línea argumentativa de ustedes. En otras palabras, el peligro que hay que evitar es el de hacer decir a otros algo que no dijeron y sacar sus ideas tan fuera de contexto que ustedes terminen por falsificarlas. También hay que prevenir el reprochar a otros por omisiones - "lo que no dijo" - de información o puntos de vista que no tenían porqué proveerlos (=no venían al caso de sus argumentos o del tema discutido).

Los cuatro componentes son:

(1) descripción/resumen [que implica la actividad de seleccionar y resumir (=actividad de selección, jerarquización y síntesis) el asunto, la tesis organizadora y la estructura del artículo, los argumentos principales y las evidencias que los sustentan, etc.],

(2) análisis/interpretación [que implica la actividad de analizar, interpretar, dar sentido a los diferentes elementos seleccionados para hacer la descripción/resumen],

(3) evaluación [que implica la actividad de emitir juicios <que pueden ser tanto positivos como negativos> sobre los diferentes elementos recogidos en la "descripción" y el “análisis”; asimismo incluye referencias al interés que tiene el libro/artículo y que justifica su publicación],

(4) contextualización [que implica situar el artículo o libro - en su conjunto y/o en sus partes - en la disciplina, en el área temática, en la obra del autor, en los debates de los que forma parte, en los intereses del reseñista, etc.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***DIRECTRICES PARA LA ACTIVIDAD DE ANÁLISIS EN LA CLASE:

***Analizar los siguientes ejemplos de reseñas e identificar en ellos los cuatro componentes definidos anteriormente.

LOS DOCUMENTOS [EJEMPLOS DE RESEÑAS] PARA EL TRABAJO EN CLASE: ESTOS DOCUMENTOS SE ENCUENTRAN EN EL GRUPO 2 [ÍCONOS] DE LOS ARCHIVOS AL PIE DE LA PÁGINA "Documentos de Apoyo y Enlaces" (esta página, de acuerdo con el tamaño de su monitor, se encuentra bajo el título "MORE" si no aparece en el primer nivel de títulos):

Dolis, John. "Review of The Literary in Theory." Jonathan Culler. Stanford: Stanford U. Press, 2007. COMPARATIVE LITERATURE STUDIES 45.3 (2008): 401-404.

Miller, Adam. "Review of The Literary in Theory." Jonathan Culler. Stanford: Stanford U. Press, 2007. The Modest Proposal (Winter 2009).

-------------------

¡OJO! CONSULTAR PARA ESTE EJERCICIO LOS DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO QUE SE ENCUENTRAN EN LA PÁGINA "Guías para los trabajos de redacción/Criterios de Evaluación" (que se encuentra bajo el título "MORE"):

-“GUÍA PARA LA LECTURA DE ARTÍCULOS (PISTAS DE TRABAJO)”,

-“CRITERIOS PARA LA EVALUACIÓN DE LECTURAS CRÍTICAS/RESEÑAS DE LIBROS Y ARTÍCULOS”,

-OTROS DOCUMENTOS RELATIVOS A LA REDACCIÓN DE RESEÑAS : "(2) Reseñas/Book Reviews/Base para el repaso de la literatura 2".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------ASIGNACIÓN PARA LA CLASE DEL 23 DE AGOSTO -----------

PARA LA PREPARACIÓN DE LOS TEMAS QUE SE DISCUTIRÁN EN LA PRÓXIMA CLASE DEBERÁN CONSULTAR LOS DOCUMENTOS DE BASE/APOYO Y SEGUIR LAS DIRECTRICES QUE SE INDICAN A CONTINUACIÓN:

TEMA (1): LA LITERATURA COMPARADA.

*(a) Definición identitaria y demarcación territorial. Introducción a la literatura comparada como disciplina académica y al comparatismo como método de análisis e investigación: tentativas de "definición".

**(b) Historia/desarrollo de la disciplina. En esta sub-unidad estaremos analizando la evolución de la disciplina en el tiempo.

1.1. Para los temas de la definición e historia de la disciplina de la literatura comparada entre el 1950 y el 2017:

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE:

(1) LITE 6007 lite comp definiciones.docx

(2) Esquema: Áreas de estudio de la literatura comparada / LITE6007AREAS DE LITE COMP.docx

[AMBOS SE ENCUENTRAN EN EL GRUPO 1 (LISTADO) EN LOS ARCHIVOS AL PIE DE LA PÁGINA DE "Documentos de Apoyo"].

-----------------------

(3) El Bernheimer Report: Comparative Literature in an Age of Multiculturalism (1993-1995), el Informe de Haun Saussy: Comparative Literature in an Age of Globalization (2004-2006). VER EL RESUMEN DE LAS IDEAS CENTRALES DE AMBOS INFORMES EN LA PÁGINA DE "Documentos de Apoyo".

-----------------------

(4) El informe más reciente [colectivo y digital]: The State of the Discipline (2014-2016) y tres de las entradas en este informe:

Rebecca Walkowitz. "Future Reading". How will we read literary works in the future? And how does thinking about the future of literary works change the way we read?

Haun Saussy. "Comparative Literature: The Next Ten Years". We can confidently predict that ten years from now, comparative literature will be in a state of crisis. It is always in crisis. In 2004 I ventured that nothing has ever defined comparative literature so well as the search for its own definition, a search conducted between and against better-established fields. That continued sense of crisis, however, is one we make for ourselves. External conditions impose another shape on comparative literature's sense of crisis.

Gail Finney. "The Reign of the Amoeba: Further Thoughts about the Future of Comparative Literature". Based on recent curricular trends in Comparative Literature, publications in leading online and print journals, and practices implemented by current graduate students and young faculty, this essay suggests that the discipline of Comparative Literature promises to move in increasingly interdisciplinary directions.

--------------------

(5) Kushner, Eva. "Is Comparative Literature Ready for the Twenty-First Century?." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2.4 (2000): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.1096>

--------------------

(6) En CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017) [número especial dedicado al tema: "Against the "Death" of the Discipline of Comparative Literature"]:

Cao, Shunqing. "Introduction to Against the “Death” of the Discipline of Comparative Literature." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.3118>

Du, Ping. "Another Argument on the "Crisis Said" of Comparative Literature." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.3110>

Han, Zhoukun; and Wen, Quan. "Reflections on the Crisis of Comparative Literature in the Contemporary West." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.3119>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LAS ASIGNACIONES 1-3 NO SON PARA ENTREGAR SINO PARA PODER PARTICIPAR EN LA DISCUSIÓN EN CLASE.

1.1.1. Desde los años '50 hasta los años '70. Estas son las etapas de la auto-afirmación, determinación de estándares, delimitación de prácticas y protocolos institucionales.

ASIGNACIÓN 1:

*Analicen los dos documentos (1) y (2) de los DOCUMENTOS DE BASE a partir de los siguientes criterios: <tipo de disciplina, objeto de estudio, metas u objetivos, metodología, requisitos, vínculo con otras disciplinas, consideraciones filosóficas o políticas, proyectos, supuestos ideológicos, otro>.

1.1.2. Desde los años '90 hasta el 2006. Hacia una disciplina sin identidad estable y sin fronteras: ¿expansión ilimitada/imperialismo disciplinario o extinción paulatina?

ASIGNACIÓN 2:

*Dénle un vistazo al resumen de las ideas centrales de los dos Informes que se encuentran en el (3) de los DOCUMENTOS DE BASE para que tengan una visión de conjunto de las tendencias en la disciplina entre 1993 y 2006.

1.1.3. Desde el 2007 al 2017. Estado actual y proyecciones. De lo multicultural, lo inter/transdisciplinario, lo intertextual y lo teórico a la globalización de lo literario, lo transnacional, la remediación ["transmediality"], los estudios culturales comparados, la traductología y la ecocrítica.

ASIGNACIÓN 3:

*Identifiquen las proyecciones para la disciplina que se hacen en UNO de los documentos que se encuentran en los incisos (4) y (5) y UNO del inciso (6) de los DOCUMENTOS DE BASE.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMA (2): La institucionalización de la disciplina en sus programas académicos graduados. En esta unidad estaremos analizando la práctica disciplinaria en los centros de estudio más reconocidos en diferentes partes del mundo.

***Para el tema de la institucionalización de la disciplina en programas académicos graduados: Estos son algunos de los programas graduados más reconocidos en el campo de la literatura comparada en los Estados Unidos: Harvard, Columbia, Yale, Cornell, NYU, University of Chicago, Duke, Stanford, University of California at Berkeley, at Irvine, at Davis, The University of Texas at Austin, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. También deberán considerar programas graduados en universidades en todos los continentes y regiones.

ASIGNACIÓN 4: INFORME ORAL.

***PRIMERA EVALUACIÓN ORAL: Presentación de dos programas graduados.

[=LOS ESTUDIANTES DEL PROGRAMA GRADUADO DE LITERATURA COMPARADA ESCOGERÁN PROGRAMAS DE LITERATURA COMPARADA. LAS ESTUDIANTES DEL PROGRAMA GRADUADO DE ESTUDIOS HISPÁNICOS ESCOGERÁN PROGRAMAS DE SU ÁREA DISCIPLINARIA, ESTUDIOS HISPÁNICOS.]

FORMATO: 10 minutos de informe oral + Hoja-bosquejo.

FECHA LÍMITE PARA EL ENVÍO DE LA HOJA-BOSQUEJO DE LA PRESENTACIÓN: Enviarán copia de esta hoja a los compañeros de la clase (y a mí) antes del mediodía del MIÉRCOLES 23 DE AGOSTO. VER LAS DIRECTRICES MÁS ESPECÍFICAS EN LA PÁGINA "EVALUACIONES".

*Escojan DOS programas graduados [=LOS ESTUDIANTES DEL PROGRAMA GRADUADO DE LITERATURA COMPARADA ESCOGERÁN PROGRAMAS DE LITERATURA COMPARADA. LAS ESTUDIANTES DEL PROGRAMA GRADUADO DE ESTUDIOS HISPÁNICOS ESCOGERÁN PROGRAMAS DE SU ÁREA DISCIPLINARIA, ESTUDIOS HISPÁNICOS.] y analícenlos a partir de los siguientes criterios: <título del programa, definición/concepción de la disciplina, visión del programa, objeto[s] de estudio, metas y objetivos, metodología[s], requisitos, identificación con un momento histórico del desarrollo de la disciplina, con una definición o con una figura particular de la disciplina, otro>. ¡OJO! Presten atención no sólo a las expresiones explícitas de definición, visión, etc. de la disciplina sino también a las expresiones implícitas/indirectas, tales como los cursos que se ofrecen, los temas de las tesis que se escriben, las revistas que se patrocinan, etc. Incluyan estas referencias en su análisis como elementos claves de sus prácticas disciplinarias.

Deberán escoger un programa de los Estados Unidos y el segundo de otro país y preparar una presentación oral de 10 minutos sobre los programas seleccionados. Las páginas web de los programas les servirán de base para este ejercicio. No olviden que estas páginas recogen la manera en que estos programas se conciben, se describen y se anuncian. Corresponden, por lo tanto, a la auto-imagen que desean proyectar y a la descripción de su misión y sus prácticas disciplinarias.

GUÍA PARA LA PRESENTACIÓN: (a) Organizar la información bajo los criterios que se usan en el análisis de los programas (=título del programa, definición/concepción de la disciplina, etc.). (b) Preparar una hoja en la que se resume esta información (=tipo bosquejo). Enviarán copia de esta hoja a los compañeros de la clase (y a mí) antes del mediodía del día de la presentación. La idea es que tengamos copia del bosquejo de la presentación a mano (o a ojo) durante las presentaciones. (c) La presentación (y, por lo tanto, la copia del bosquejo) deberá dividirse en dos partes: una primera parte descriptiva del programa, dividida según los criterios utilizados en el análisis, y una segunda parte evaluativa en la que expresan su opinión personal sobre los programas seleccionados. En esta segunda parte, podrán comparar los programas que seleccionaron entre sí.

----------------------------------------------

RECAPITULACIÓN: VER EL RESUMEN COMPARATIVO QUE SE HACE EN LA PÁGINA "Documentos de Apoyo": "COMPARATIVE LITERATURE THEN/COMPARATIVE LITERATURE NOW".

PROYECCIONES FUTURAS Y EVALUACIONES RETROSPECTIVAS DE LA DÉCADA 2014-2024: VER LA PRESENTACIÓN QUE SE HACE EN LA PÁGINA "Documentos de Apoyo" AL RESPECTO:

https://stateofthediscipline.acla.org/

THE 2024 REPORT ON THE STATE OF THE DISCIPLINE OF COMPARATIVE LITERATURE. CFP—State of the Discipline Report.

¡OJO! No se olvide que el propósito de esta unidad/sesión es examinar las definiciones cambiantes de la disciplina, su desarrollo en el tiempo y sus diversas manifestaciones y prácticas institucionales en el espacio académico actual.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23 DE AGOSTO - SESIÓN 2

- ¡RECORDATORIO! - TEMA CENTRAL Y ÚNICO DE ESTA CLASE -

***En esta primera unidad/sesión estaremos analizando la definición y la evolución de la disciplina de la literatura comparada en el tiempo y sus diversas manifestaciones, líneas de investigación y prácticas disciplinarias en el espacio académico actual.***

A. EL COMPONENTE DISCIPLINARIO: ¿Qué es la literatura comparada? ¿De dónde viene, dónde está y hacia dónde va?

TEMARIO Y DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO

TEMA (1): LA LITERATURA COMPARADA. Definición identitaria y demarcación territorial: Introducción a la literatura comparada como disciplina académica y al comparatismo como método de análisis e investigación: tentativas de "definición".

DOCUMENTOS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN: a] LITE 6007 lite comp definiciones.docx y b] Esquema: Áreas de estudio de la literatura comparada

DISCUSIÓN EN CLASE: Se analizarán y discutirán estos dos documentos a partir de los siguientes criterios: <tipo de disciplina, objeto de estudio, metas u objetivos, metodología, requisitos, vínculo con otras disciplinas, consideraciones filosóficas o políticas, proyectos, supuestos ideológicos, otro>.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMA (2): Historia/desarrollo de la disciplina. Bajo este tema estaremos analizando la evolución de la disciplina en el tiempo.

-El trasfondo y los comienzos: Factor importante que tuvo lugar a fines del Siglo XVIII y principios del Siglo XIX: finales de la hegemonía de los modelos clásicos (=un solo mundo poético, una sola "literatura"). De una poética general a una distribución en literaturas nacionales. La "literatura" se reparte, se dispersa, tiende una y otra vez a reordenarse. Los estudios "comparatistas" (i.e. la "literatura comparada") en su sentido moderno arrancan durante el segundo y tercero decenios del siglo XIX. Los orígenes "franceses" de la disciplina: La publicación en 1816 de una serie de antologías creadas para la enseñanza de "literatura" bajo el título Cours de littérature comparée. Abel-François Villemain (=publicación de sus conferencias en Paris <1828-1830>), Philarète Chasles, JJ Ampère). Enfoque histórico. La literatura comparada como disciplina histórica, no tanto estética, más bien como "historia comparada de 'literaturas'".

http://compalit.blogspot.com/2013/11/origins-and-development-of-comparative.html Origins and Development of Comparative Literature

First Appearance of the Term: Susan Bassnett in her Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction states: There is General agreement that comparative literature acquired its name from a series French anthologies used for the teaching of literature, published in 1816 and entitled Cours de littérature comparée. In an essay discussing the origins of the term, René Wellek notes that this title was 'unused and unexplained' but he also shows how the term seems to have crept into use through 1820s and 1830s in France. He suggests that the German version of the term, 'vergleichende Literaturgeschichte', first appeared in a book by Moriz Carrière in 1854, while the earliest English usage is attributed to Matthew Arnold, who referred to 'comparative literatures' in the plural in a letter of 1848. (page 12)

Why the use of the adjective "comparative"? At the time, the scientific boom has led to the rise of comparatism as a method or an approach in the philosophy of science where a given thing is not judged to be true or false in itself but as related to something else. Comparatism was the spirit of the age. Comparatism was the methodology employed in most disciplines and literature was no exception.

The Historical Context Underlying the Birth of Comparative Literature: According to Susan Basnnett, "The term 'comparative literature' appeared in an age of transition. In Europe, as nations struggled for independence - from the Ottoman Empire, from the Austro-Hungarian Empire, from France, from Russia - and new nation states came into being, national identity (whatever that was) was inextricably bound up with national culture (however that was defined)." (page 20)

The Mechanisms Underlying the Birth of Comparative Literature: What becomes apparent when we look at the origins of comparative literature is that the term predated the subject. People used the phrase 'comparative literature' without having clear ideas about what it was. With the advantages of retrospection, ***we can see that 'comparative' was set against 'national', and whilst the study of 'national' literatures risked accusations of partisanship, the study of 'comparative' literature carried with it a sense of transcendence of the narrowly nationalistic. In other words, the term was used loosely but was associated with the desire for peace in Europe and for harmony between nations. Central to this idealism was also the belief that comparison could be undertaken on mutual basis. (Susan Basnnett, page 21).

***Comparative literature seen as a reaction to nationalism in Europe.

Referencias:

Susan Bassnett. Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993.

Claudio Guillén. Entre lo uno y lo diverso. Introducción a la literatura comparada. Barcelona: Critica, 1985.

- Esquema evolutivo I: Panorama histórico y evolución del término y de la disciplina: los años '50, ’60 y ’70. Esquema: Áreas de estudio de la literatura comparada.

Auto-afirmación, determinación de estándares, delimitación de prácticas y protocolos institucionales.

- Esquema evolutivo II: De los años ’90 al 2017. Esquema: Áreas de estudio de la literatura comparada. En torno al Bernheimer Report: Comparative Literature in an Age of Multiculturalism (1993-1995), el Informe de Haun Saussy: Comparative Literature in an Age of Globalization (2004-2006) y ***el informe más reciente [colectivo y digital]: The State of the Discipline (2014-2016).

Hacia una disciplina sin identidad estable y sin fronteras: ¿expansión ilimitada/imperialismo disciplinario o extinción paulatina? De lo multicultural, lo inter/trans-disciplinario, lo intertextual y lo teórico a la globalización de lo literario, lo trans-nacional, la re-mediación ["transmediality"], los estudios culturales comparados, la traductología y la eco-crítica.

DOCUMENTOS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

En The State of the Discipline (2014-2016):

Rebecca Walkowitz. "Future Reading". How will we read literary works in the future? And how does thinking about the future of literary works change the way we read?

--------------------------------------------------

Kushner, Eva. "Is Comparative Literature Ready for the Twenty-First Century?." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 2.4 (2000): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.1096>

---------------------------------------------------

En CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017) [número especial dedicado al tema: "Against the "Death" of the Discipline of Comparative Literature"].

Cao, Shunqing. "Introduction to Against the “Death” of the Discipline of Comparative Literature." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.3118>

Du, Ping. "Another Argument on the "Crisis Said" of Comparative Literature." CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 19.5 (2017): <https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.3110>

DISCUSIÓN EN CLASE: Se discutirán las proyecciones para la disciplina que se hacen en los documentos anteriores.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMA (3): Esquema evolutivo III: 2017-2023: Las prácticas institucionalizadas en programas académicos, coloquios, premios, reuniones anuales, etc. La institucionalización de la disciplina en sus programas académicos graduados.

DISCUSIÓN EN CLASE: Para elaborar este tema, estaremos analizando las prácticas disciplinarias en los centros de estudio más reconocidos en diferentes partes del mundo. Estos son algunos de los programas graduados más reconocidos en el campo de la literatura comparada en los Estados Unidos: Harvard, Columbia, Yale, Cornell, NYU, University of Chicago, Duke, Stanford, University of California at Berkeley, at Irvine, at Davis, The University of Texas at Austin, University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. También se considerarán programas europeos, latinoamericanos, canadienses y asiáticos.

- Esquema evolutivo III: 2017-2023: La práctica institucionalizada en programas académicos, coloquios, premios, reuniones anuales, etc.

PRESENTACIONES ORALES DE LOS PROGRAMAS SELECCIONADOS

LOS ESTUDIANTES DEL PROGRAMA GRADUADO DE LITERATURA COMPARADA ESCOGERÁN PROGRAMAS DE LITERATURA COMPARADA. LAS ESTUDIANTES DEL PROGRAMA GRADUADO DE ESTUDIOS HISPÁNICOS ESCOGERÁN PROGRAMAS DE SU ÁREA DISCIPLINARIA, ESTUDIOS HISPÁNICOS.

DISCUSIÓN EN CLASE: Se discutirán las páginas web de los programas académicos de Literatura Comparada (de nivel graduado) que ustedes hayan seleccionado a partir de los siguientes criterios: <título del programa, definición/concepción de la disciplina, visión del programa, objeto[s] de estudio, metas y objetivos, metodología[s], requisitos, identificación con un momento histórico del desarrollo de la disciplina, con una definición o con una figura particular de la disciplina, otro>. ¡OJO! Presten atención no sólo a las expresiones explícitas de definición, visión, etc. de la disciplina sino también a las expresiones implícitas/indirectas, tales como los cursos que se ofrecen, los temas de las tesis que se escriben, las revistas que se patrocinan, etc.

----------------

RECAPITULACIÓN: DISCUSIÓN A PARTIR DEL RESUMEN COMPARATIVO QUE SE HACE EN LA PÁGINA "Documentos de Apoyo": "COMPARATIVE LITERATURE THEN/COMPARATIVE LITERATURE NOW".

PROYECCIONES FUTURAS Y EVALUACIONES RETROSPECTIVAS DE LA DÉCADA 2014-2024: VER LA PRESENTACIÓN QUE SE HACE EN LA PÁGINA "Documentos de Apoyo" AL RESPECTO:

https://stateofthediscipline.acla.org/

THE 2024 REPORT ON THE STATE OF THE DISCIPLINE OF COMPARATIVE LITERATURE. CFP—State of the Discipline Report.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------ASIGNACIÓN PARA EL 30 DE AGOSTO -----------

CONSULTAR LOS DOCUMENTOS DE BASE/APOYO Y SEGUIR LAS DIRECTRICES QUE SE INDICAN A CONTINUACIÓN:

TEMA (1): COMPONENTE DE INVESTIGACIÓN I: Introducción a la redacción de reseñas como parte del componente de investigación. Base también para la lectura crítico-analítica de artículos, el repaso de la literatura y la bibliografía anotada/comentada en ensayos argumentativos.

ASIGNACIÓN 1:

*** CONSULTEN LA SUB-PÁGINA DE LAS "EVALUACIONES"***

----- ASIGNACIÓN PARA EVALUACIÓN ESCRITA 1 ------

***PRIMERA EVALUACIÓN ESCRITA: Lectura crítico-analítica de una reseña.

FORMATO: 3-4 páginas, Font 11, Espacio 1.5.

FECHA LÍMITE PARA EL ENVÍO DE LA LECTURA CRÍTICO-ANALÍTICA: MIÉRCOLES 30 DE AGOSTO DE 2023 ANTES DE MEDIODÍA.

***Se discutirán en entrevistas individuales.

-------------------------------

TEMA (2): LA TEORÍA/CRÍTICA LITERARIA. Problemas de definición. Fronteras, debates y polémicas, marcos conceptuales, objetivos, áreas de trabajo, glosario de términos. ¿Corrientes, escuelas, etiquetas, banderas, sombrillas? La “teoría de la literatura” de R. Wellek y A. Warren VS la “teoría” de Jonathan Culler <”not theory of literature, mind you; just plain ‘theory’”>.

***Para el tema de la definición de la teoría y la crítica literarias:

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE:

(1) Wellek, René y A. Warren. "Teoría, crítica e historia literarias." en Teoría Literaria. Madrid: Gredos, 1969: 47-56.

(2) Culler, Jonathan. "What is Theory?" en Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997: 1-17.

ASIGNACIÓN 2:

Lean los artículos de R. Wellek y A. Warren y de J. Culler a partir de las siguientes preguntas.

En qué sentido puede decirse que entre la “teoría de la literatura” de R. Wellek y A. Warren y la “teoría” de Jonathan Culler <”not theory of literature, mind you; just plain ‘theory’” (p.1)> se modifica tanto la concepción de lo literario como de lo teórico? ¿Cómo cambia el objetivo (i.e. eje, propósito, objeto de estudio, tipo de estudio, forma de argumentar, etc.) de esta área de estudio (i.e. la llamada teoría literaria)?

***La discusión en clase girará en torno a las respuestas que se les dé a estas preguntas. Ver también los esquemas que resumen los puntos principales de ambos documentos. Estos están en los Archivos al pie de las páginas.

-----------------------------

TEMA (3): La pre-historia. De Platón a la propuesta romántica de William Wordsworth / Samuel Taylor Coleridge y el humanismo moral de Matthew Arnold.

TRASFONDO EXPLICATIVO:

https://www.britannica.com/art/literary-criticism/Historical-development

HISTORICA DEVELOPMENT.

Antiquity

Although almost all of the criticism ever written dates from the 20th century, questions first posed by Plato and Aristotle are still of prime concern, and every critic who has attempted to justify the social value of literature has had to come to terms with the opposing argument made by Plato in The Republic. The poet as a man and poetry as a form of statement both seemed untrustworthy to Plato, who depicted the physical world as an imperfect copy of transcendent ideas and poetry as a mere copy of the copy. Thus, literature could only mislead the seeker of truth. Plato credited the poet with divine inspiration, but this, too, was cause for worry; a man possessed by such madness would subvert the interests of a rational polity. Poets were therefore to be banished from the hypothetical republic. [PLATO VS ARISTOTLE DEBATE] [TRUTH] [SOCIAL/ETHICAL VALUE]

In his Poetics—still the most respected of all discussions of literature—Aristotle countered Plato’s indictment by stressing what is normal and useful about literary art. The tragic poet is not so much divinely inspired as he is motivated by a universal human need to imitate, and what he imitates is not something like a bed (Plato’s example) but a noble action. Such imitation presumably has a civilizing value for those who empathize with it. Tragedy does arouse emotions of pity and terror in its audience, but these emotions are purged in the process (katharsis). In this fashion Aristotle succeeded in portraying literature as satisfying and regulating human passions instead of inflaming them. [REPRESENTATION/IMITATION/MIMESIS] [EMOTIONS->CATHARSIS]

Although Plato and Aristotle are regarded as antagonists, the narrowness of their disagreement is noteworthy. Both maintain that poetry is mimetic, both treat the arousing of emotion in the perceiver, and both feel that poetry takes its justification, if any, from its service to the state. It was obvious to both men that poets wielded great power over others. Unlike many modern critics who have tried to show that poetry is more than a pastime, Aristotle had to offer reassurance that it was not socially explosive.

Aristotle’s practical contribution to criticism, as opposed to his ethical defense of literature, lies in his inductive treatment of the elements and kinds of poetry. Poetic modes are identified according to their means of imitation, the actions they imitate, the manner of imitation, and its effects. These distinctions assist the critic in judging each mode according to its proper ends instead of regarding beauty as a fixed entity. The ends of tragedy, as Aristotle conceived them, are best served by the harmonious disposition of six elements: plot, character, diction, thought, spectacle, and song. Thanks to Aristotle’s insight into universal aspects of audience psychology, many of his dicta have proved to be adaptable to genres developed long after his time.

Later Greek and Roman criticism offers no parallel to Aristotle’s originality. Much ancient criticism, such as that of Cicero, Horace, and Quintilian in Rome, was absorbed in technical rules of exegesis and advice to aspiring rhetoricians. Horace’s verse epistle The Art of Poetry is an urbane amplification of Aristotle’s emphasis on the decorum or internal propriety of each genre, now including lyric, pastoral, satire, elegy, and epigram, as well as Aristotle’s epic, tragedy, and comedy. This work was later to be prized by Neoclassicists of the 17th century not only for its rules but also for its humour, common sense, and appeal to educated taste. On the Sublime, by the Roman-Greek known as “Longinus,” was to become influential in the 18th century but for a contrary reason: when decorum began to lose its sway encouragement could be found in Longinus for arousing elevated and ecstatic feeling in the reader. Horace and Longinus developed, respectively, the rhetorical and the affective sides of Aristotle’s thought, but Longinus effectively reversed the Aristotelian concern with regulation of the passions. [DECORUM/INTERNAL APPROPRIATENESS/REGULATION/LAWS/PROPRIETY/BALANCE/HARMONY/CRAFTMANSHIP [ARISTOTELIAN/NEOCLASICISM]] VS [PASSION/ECSTATIC FEELING/GENIUS/INSPIRATION/THE SUBLIME [PLATONIC/ROMANTIC]

Medieval period

In the Christian Middle Ages criticism suffered from the loss of nearly all the ancient critical texts and from an antipagan distrust of the literary imagination. Such Church Fathers as Tertullian, Augustine, and Jerome renewed, in churchly guise, the Platonic argument against poetry. But both the ancient gods and the surviving classics reasserted their fascination, entering medieval culture in theologically allegorized form. Encyclopaedists and textual commentators explained the supposed Christian content of pre-Christian works and the Old Testament. Although there was no lack of rhetoricians to dictate the correct use of literary figures, no attempt was made to derive critical principles from emergent genres such as the fabliau and the chivalric romance. Criticism was in fact inhibited by the very coherence of the theologically explained universe. When nature is conceived as endlessly and purposefully symbolic of revealed truth, specifically literary problems of form and meaning are bound to be neglected. Even such an original vernacular poet of the 14th century as Dante appears to have expected his Divine Comedy to be interpreted according to the rules of scriptural exegesis.

The Renaissance

Renaissance criticism grew directly from the recovery of classic texts and notably from Giorgio Valla’s translation of Aristotle’s Poetics into Latin in 1498. By 1549 the Poetics had been rendered into Italian as well. From this period until the later part of the 18th century Aristotle was once again the most imposing presence behind literary theory. Critics looked to ancient poems and plays for insight into the permanent laws of art. The most influential of Renaissance critics was probably Lodovico Castelvetro, whose 1570 commentary on Aristotle’s Poetics encouraged the writing of tightly structured plays by extending and codifying Aristotle’s idea of the dramatic unities. It is difficult today to appreciate that this obeisance to antique models had a liberating effect; one must recall that imitation of the ancients entailed rejecting scriptural allegory and asserting the individual author’s ambition to create works that would be unashamedly great and beautiful. Classicism, individualism, and national pride joined forces against literary asceticism. Thus, a group of 16th-century French writers known as the Pléiade—notably Pierre de Ronsard and Joachim du Bellay—were simultaneously classicists, poetic innovators, and advocates of a purified vernacular tongue.

The ideas of the Italian and French Renaissance were transmitted to England by Roger Ascham, George Gascoigne, Sir Philip Sidney, and others. Gascoigne’s “Certayne notes of Instruction” (1575), the first English manual of versification, had a considerable effect on poetic practice in the Elizabethan Age. Sidney’s Defence of Poesie (1595) vigorously argued the poet’s superiority to the philosopher and the historian on the grounds that his imagination is chained neither to lifeless abstractions nor to dull actualities. The poet “doth not only show the way, but giveth so sweet a prospect into the way, as will entice any man to enter into it.” While still honouring the traditional conception of poetry’s role as bestowing pleasure and instruction, Sidney’s essay presages the Romantic claim that the poetic mind is a law unto itself.

Neoclassicism and its decline

The Renaissance in general could be regarded as a neoclassical period, in that ancient works were considered the surest models for modern greatness. Neoclassicism, however, usually connotes narrower attitudes that are at once literary and social: a worldly-wise tempering of enthusiasm, a fondness for proved ways, a gentlemanly sense of propriety and balance. Criticism of the 17th and 18th centuries, particularly in France, was dominated by these Horatian norms. French critics such as Pierre Corneille and Nicolas Boileau urged a strict orthodoxy regarding the dramatic unities and the requirements of each distinct genre, as if to disregard them were to lapse into barbarity. The poet was not to imagine that his genius exempted him from the established laws of craftsmanship.

Neoclassicism had a lesser impact in England, partly because English Puritanism had kept alive some of the original Christian hostility to secular art, partly because English authors were on the whole closer to plebeian taste than were the court-oriented French, and partly because of the difficult example of Shakespeare, who magnificently broke all of the rules. Not even the relatively severe classicist Ben Jonson could bring himself to deny Shakespeare’s greatness, and the theme of Shakespearean genius triumphing over formal imperfections is echoed by major British critics from John Dryden and Alexander Pope through Samuel Johnson. The science of Newton and the psychology of Locke also worked subtle changes on neoclassical themes. Pope’s Essay on Criticism (1711) is a Horatian compendium of maxims, but Pope feels obliged to defend the poetic rules as “Nature methodiz’d”—a portent of quite different literary inferences from Nature. Dr. Johnson, too, though he respected precedent, was above all a champion of moral sentiment and “mediocrity,” the appeal to generally shared traits. His preference for forthright sincerity left him impatient with such intricate conventions as those of the pastoral elegy.

The decline of Neoclassicism is hardly surprising; literary theory had developed very little during two centuries of artistic, political, and scientific ferment. The 18th century’s important new genre, the novel, drew most of its readers from a bourgeoisie that had little use for aristocratic dicta. A Longinian cult of “feeling” gradually made headway, in various European countries, against Neoclassical canons of proportion and moderation. Emphasis shifted from concern for meeting fixed criteria to the subjective state of the reader and then of the author himself. The spirit of nationalism entered criticism as a concern for the origins and growth of one’s own native literature and as an esteem for such non-Aristotelian factors as “the spirit of the age.” Historical consciousness produced by turns theories of literary progress and primitivistic theories affirming, as one critic put it, that “barbarous” times are the most favourable to the poetic spirit. The new recognition of strangeness and strong feeling as literary virtues yielded various fashions of taste for misty sublimity, graveyard sentiments, medievalism, Norse epics (and forgeries), Oriental tales, and the verse of plowboys. Perhaps the most eminent foes of Neoclassicism before the 19th century were Denis Diderot in France and, in Germany, Gotthold Lessing, Johann von Herder, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, and Friedrich Schiller.

Romanticism

Romanticism, an amorphous movement that began in Germany and England at the turn of the 19th century, and somewhat later in France, Italy, and the United States, found spokesmen as diverse as Goethe and August and Friedrich von Schlegel in Germany, William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge in England, Madame de Staël and Victor Hugo in France, Alessandro Manzoni in Italy, and Ralph Waldo Emerson and Edgar Allan Poe in the United States. Romantics tended to regard the writing of poetry as a transcendentally important activity, closely related to the creative perception of meaning in the world. The poet was credited with the godlike power that Plato had feared in him; Transcendental philosophy was, indeed, a derivative of Plato’s metaphysical Idealism. In the typical view of Percy Bysshe Shelley, poetry “strips the veil of familiarity from the world, and lays bare the naked and sleeping beauty, which is the spirit of its forms."

Wordsworth’s preface to Lyrical Ballads (1800), with its definition of poetry as the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings and its attack on Neoclassical diction, is regarded as the opening statement of English Romanticism. In England, however, only Coleridge in his Biographia Literaria (1817) embraced the whole complex of Romantic doctrines emanating from Germany; the British empiricist tradition was too firmly rooted to be totally washed aside by the new metaphysics. Most of those who were later called Romantics did share an emphasis on individual passion and inspiration, a taste for symbolism and historical awareness, and a conception of art works as internally whole structures in which feelings are dialectically merged with their contraries. Romantic criticism coincided with the emergence of aesthetics as a separate branch of philosophy, and both signalled a weakening in ethical demands upon literature. The lasting achievement of Romantic theory is its recognition that artistic creations are justified, not by their promotion of virtue, but by their own coherence and intensity.

The late 19th century

The Romantic movement had been spurred not only by German philosophy but also by the universalistic and utopian hopes that accompanied the French Revolution. Some of those hopes were thwarted by political reaction, while others were blunted by industrial capitalism and the accession to power of the class that had demanded general liberty. Advocates of the literary imagination now began to think of themselves as enemies or gadflies of the newly entrenched bourgeoisie. In some hands the idea of creative freedom dwindled to a bohemianism pitting “art for its own sake” against commerce and respectability. Aestheticism characterized both the Symbolist criticism of Charles Baudelaire in France and the self-conscious decadence of Algernon Swinburne, Walter Pater, and Oscar Wilde in England. At an opposite extreme, realistic and naturalistic views of literature as an exact record of social truth were developed by Vissarion Belinsky in Russia, Gustave Flaubert and Émile Zola in France, and William Dean Howells in the United States. Zola’s program, however, was no less anti-bourgeois than that of the Symbolists; he wanted novels to document conditions so as to expose their injustice. Post-Romantic disillusion was epitomized in Britain in the criticism of Matthew Arnold, who thought of critical taste as a substitute for religion and for the unsatisfactory values embodied in every social class.

Toward the end of the 19th century, especially in Germany, England, and the United States, literary study became an academic discipline “at the doctoral level.” Philology, linguistics, folklore study, and the textual principles that had been devised for biblical criticism provided curricular guidelines, while academic taste mirrored the prevailing impressionistic concern for the quality of the author’s spirit. Several intellectual currents joined to make possible the writing of systematic and ambitious literary histories. Primitivism and Medievalism had awakened interest in neglected early texts; scientific Positivism encouraged a scrupulous regard for facts; and the German idea that each country’s literature had sprung from a unique national consciousness provided a conceptual framework. The French critic Hippolyte Taine’s History of English Literature (published in French, 1863–69) reflected the prevailing determinism of scientific thought; for him a work could be explained in terms of the race, milieu, and moment that produced it. For other critics of comparable stature, such as Charles Sainte-Beuve in France, Benedetto Croce in Italy, and George Saintsbury in England, historical learning only threw into relief the expressive uniqueness of each artistic temperament.

***Para el tema de la historia/el desarrollo de la teoría y la crítica literarias:

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE: (1) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg (2) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg

ASIGNACIÓN 3: Estudiar los documentos de base anteriores y la bibliografía de apoyo y tenerlos a mano para la discusión en clase.

BIBLIOGRAFÍA DE APOYO:

Golban, Petru and Estella A. Ciobanu. A Short History of Literary Criticism. Kütaya, Turkey: Üç Mart Press, 2007/2008.

***Habib, M.A.R. Literary Criticism from Plato to the Present: an Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

Harland, Richard. Literary Theory from Plato to Barthes, an introductory history. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

30 DE AGOSTO - SESIÓN 3

NUEVO 8/29/23

ORDEN DE DISCUSIÓN PARA LA CLASE :

(1) LA CLASE COMENZARÁ CON LOS TRES INFORMES SOBRE LA INSTITUCIONALIZACIÓN DE LAS DISCIPLINAS QUE NO SE PRESENTARON EN LA CLASE ANTERIOR Y UN RESUMEN DE LO MÁS IMPORTANTE QUE SE DEBE RETENER DE ESA PRIMERA UNIDAD.

(2) EN SEGUNDO LUGAR, SE DISCUTIRÁN LOS DOS ARTÍCULOS (=Wellek y Culler) QUE RECOGEN LAS DOS DEFINICIONES PRINCIPALES DE LO QUE SE ENTIENDE POR "TEORÍA <LITERARIA>".

(3) SE CUBRIRÁ LO QUE EL TIEMPO PERMITA DE LA "PRE-HISTORIA DE LA TEORÍA/CRÍTICA LITERARIA" Y SE HARÁN COMENTARIOS GENERALES SOBRE LAS RESEñAS.

TEMA (1): COMPONENTE DE INVESTIGACIÓN I: Lectura analítico-crítica de artículos y redacción de reseñas. ***Se harán comentarios generales sobre las reseñas del ejercicio para evaluación que se entregó ese día. Los trabajos se devolverán y se discutirán en entrevistas individuales.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMA (2) Y PRINCIPAL DE LA CLASE : EL COMPONENTE TEÓRICO-CRÍTICO GENERAL.

A. LA TEORÍA/CRÍTICA LITERARIA. Problemas de definición. Fronteras, debates y polémicas, marcos conceptuales, objetivos, áreas de trabajo, glosario de términos. ¿Corrientes, escuelas, etiquetas, banderas, sombrillas? La “teoría de la literatura” de R. Wellek y A. Warren VS la “teoría” de Jonathan Culler <”not theory of literature, mind you; just plain ‘theory’”>.

PREGUNTAS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

LECTURAS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

(1) Wellek, René y A. Warren. "Teoría, crítica e historia literarias." in Teoría Literaria. Madrid: Gredos, 1953,1969: 47-56.

--------------------. Theory of literature. New York: Hartcourt, Brace and Company, 1942, 1947, 1949.

(2) Culler, Jonathan. "What is Theory?" in Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997: 1-17.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxsaXRlNjAwN3JvZHJpZ3VlemNhc3Ryb3xneDozZjBiMTkyOThmNWYzMjIw

"teoría" según Culler [en español] https://teorialiteraria2009.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/escanear0001.pdf

***LOS ARTÍCULOS Y LOS ESQUEMAS DE LOS ARTÍCULOS DE CULLER Y WELLEK/WARREN ESTÁN EN EL ARCHIVO AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA Y DE LA PÁGINA "DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO Y ENLACES".

B. La pre-historia de la teoría/crítica literaria.

Panorama histórico: de Platón a la propuesta romántica de William Wordsworth / Samuel Taylor Coleridge y el humanismo moral de Matthew Arnold. VER LOS ESQUEMAS, LA BIBLIOGRAFÍA GENERAL DE APOYO PARA EL COMPONENTE TEÓRICO-CRÍTICO Y LAS LECTURAS DE APOYO.

DOCUMENTOS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN: (1) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg (2) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Golban, Petru and Estella A. Ciobanu. A Short History of Literary Criticism. Kütaya, Turkey: Üç Mart Press, 2007/2008.

***Habib, M.A.R. Literary Criticism from Plato to the Present: an Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

Harland, Richard. Literary Theory from Plato to Barthes, an introductory history. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------ASIGNACIÓN PARA LA CLASE DEL 6 DE SEPTIEMBRE -----------

[1] COMENZAREMOS LA PRÓXIMA CLASE CON UN REPASO DE LA DISCUSIÓN DEL ARTÍCULO DE JONATHAN CULLER. "WHAT IS THEORY?" Y RETOMAREMOS LAS DOS DEFINICIONES DEL BINOMIO TEORÍA/CRÍTICA.

TEMA (1): Teoría/Crítica/Historia de la literatura. Definiciones.

(1) Wellek, René y A. Warren. "Teoría, crítica e historia literarias." in Teoría Literaria. Madrid: Gredos, 1953,1969: 47-56.

--------------------. Theory of literature. New York: Hartcourt, Brace and Company, 1942, 1947, 1949.

(2) Culler, Jonathan. "What is Theory?" in Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997: 1-17.

---------------------------------------------------

[2] SE REPASARÁN LOS ÚLTIMOS AÑOS DEL PANORAMA HISTÓRICO DE LA ACTIVIDAD TEÓRICO-CRÍTIICA EN LA CULTURA OCCIDENTAL COMO INTRODUCCIÓN AL CONJUNTO DE PROPUESTAS FORMALISTAS DE COMIENZOS DEL SIGLO XX.

TEMA (2): La pre-historia. De Platón a la propuesta romántica de William Wordsworth / Samuel Taylor Coleridge y el humanismo moral de Matthew Arnold.

***Para el tema de la historia/el desarrollo de la teoría y la crítica literarias:

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE: (1) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg (2) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg

BIBLIOGRAFÍA DE APOYO:

Golban, Petru and Estella A. Ciobanu. A Short History of Literary Criticism. Kütaya, Turkey: Üç Mart Press, 2007/2008.

***Habib, M.A.R. Literary Criticism from Plato to the Present: an Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

Harland, Richard. Literary Theory from Plato to Barthes, an introductory history. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***TEMA PRINCIPAL:

TEMA (3): TEXTUALIDADES [1]. PROPUESTAS FORMALISTAS. Introducción a los "formalismos" del Siglo XX: el "New Criticism" (=vertiente anglo-sajona) y el "Formalismo ruso" (=vertiente europea).

1] Para el tema de las propuestas formalistas en teoría y crítica literarias. Los "formalismos" del Siglo XX: el New Criticism (=vertiente anglo-sajona) y el Formalismo ruso (=vertiente europea).

ASIGNACIÓN 1 y 2:

*Leer y analizar los siguientes documentos. Identificar su propuesta principal (con sus argumentos, sus conceptos claves e ilustraciones de apoyo) y venir preparados para discutirla en clase:

Para el New Criticism:

Palabras y conceptos claves: intentional fallacy, affective fallacy, close reading, heresy of paraphrase, organic unity, paradox, irony, ambiguity.

DOCUMENTO DE BASE: [EN ARCHIVOS]

William K. Wimsatt, Jr. y Monroe Beardsley. "The Intentional Fallacy". en The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1954. [orig. pub. 1946]

LECTURA DE APOYO:

William K. Wimsatt, Jr. y Monroe Beardsley. "The Affective Fallacy". en The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1954. [orig. pub. 1946]

¡OJ0! Para la lectura y análisis de los artículos asignados, utilice la Guía para la lectura de artículos [pistas de trabajo].

Para el Formalismo ruso:

Palabras y conceptos claves: literariedad/literaturidad/literaturnost, fabula/syuzhet, motivación, relaciones diferenciales, priëm/artificio/procedimiento/device/técnica, ostranenie/make strange/extrañamiento/ desfamiliarización/desautomatización/la dominante.

DOCUMENTO DE BASE: [EN ARCHIVOS]

en español:

Viktor Shklovski. "El arte como artificio". Teoría de los formalistas rusos. Antología preparada y presentada por Tzvetan Todorov. México: Siglo XXI Editores, 1978. [orig. pub. 1919]

en inglés:

---------------. “Art as Technique.” Russian Formalist Criticism: Four Essays. Eds. Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reiss. Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 1965. 3-24.

[PUEDEN UTILIZAR LA VERSIÓN EN INGLÉS O LA VERSIÓN EN ESPAÑOL DE LA LECTURA ANTERIOR.]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6 DE SEPTIEMBRE - SESIÓN 4

I. LA PRIMERA PARTE DE LA CLASE SE DEDICARÁ A UN REPASO DE LOS CONCEPTOS Y MATERIALES QUE SE TRABAJARON EL 30 DE AGOSTO.

LAS DOS DEFINICIONES DEL BINOMIO TEORÍA/CRÍTICA A PARTIR DE WELLEK/WARREN Y CULLER.
EL LEGADO DOBLE PLATÓN/ARISTÓTELES Y LOS ÚLTIMOS AÑOS DEL PANORAMA HISTÓRICO DE LA ACTIVIDAD TEÓRICO-CRÍTICA EN LA CULTURA OCCIDENTAL COMO INTRODUCCIÓN AL CONJUNTO DE PROPUESTAS FORMALISTAS DE COMIENZOS DEL SIGLO XX.

***II. TEMA PRINCIPAL DE LA CLASE DE HOY: TEXTUALIDADES [1]. PROPUESTAS FORMALISTAS.

-----------------------------------------

TEMA (1): Teoría/Crítica/Historia de la literatura. Definiciones. [REPASO]

(1) Wellek, René y A. Warren. "Teoría, crítica e historia literarias." in Teoría Literaria. Madrid: Gredos, 1953,1969: 47-56.

--------------------. Theory of literature. New York: Hartcourt, Brace and Company, 1942, 1947, 1949.

(2) Culler, Jonathan. "What is Theory?" in Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997: 1-17.

La discusión en clase girará en torno a las respuestas que se les dé a estas preguntas. Ver también los esquemas que resumen los puntos principales de ambos documentos.

------------------------------

TEMA (2): La pre-historia. De Platón a la propuesta romántica de William Wordsworth / Samuel Taylor Coleridge y el humanismo moral de Matthew Arnold.

***Para el tema de la historia/el desarrollo de la teoría y la crítica literarias:

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE: (1) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg (2) Figuras teoria lite 1.jpeg

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Golban, Petru and Estella A. Ciobanu. A Short History of Literary Criticism. Kütaya, Turkey: Üç Mart Press, 2007/2008.

***Habib, M.A.R. Literary Criticism from Plato to the Present: an Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. [En Archivos bajo Documentos de Apoyo]

Harland, Richard. Literary Theory from Plato to Barthes, an introductory history. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999.

-------------------------------

II. TEMA PRINCIPAL DE LA CLASE DE HOY: TEXTUALIDADES [1]. PROPUESTAS FORMALISTAS.

TEMA: TEXTUALIDADES [1]. PROPUESTAS FORMALISTAS. Introducción a los "formalismos" del Siglo XX: el "New Criticism" (=vertiente anglo-sajona) y el "Formalismo ruso" (=vertiente europea). Discusión de las lecturas (=sus conceptos claves, sus argumentos, las prácticas analíticas que generan, etc.) Rivkin and Ryan Formalisms.pdf [En Archivos]

<1> EL "FORMALISMO" ANGLOSAJÓN: "New Criticism". "Practical criticism".

Palabras y conceptos claves: intentional fallacy, affective fallacy, close reading (o close analysis), heresy of paraphrase, organic unity, paradox, irony, ambiguity.

LECTURAS DE BASE PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

(1) William K. Wimsatt, Jr. y Monroe Beardsley. "The Intentional Fallacy". en The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1954. [orig. pub. 1946]

(2) David Arnason on "New criticism". http://www.ap.krakow.pl/nkja/literature/theory/arnason [9/5/23]

The term "New Criticism" defines the critical theory that has dominated Anglo-American literary criticism for the past fifty years. ***Its method of close reading and emphasis on the text provided a corrective to fuzzy biographical criticism and subjective enthusiasm, but for many teachers in North America and Britain, it became not a method of criticism, but criticism itself. Alternatives to its interpretive strategies have until recently been regarded with deep suspicion. It is important to understand the precepts of the New Criticism as critical positions and not as the truth about literature before looking at other strategies.

[FOR "CLOSE READING AND EMPHASIS ON THE TEXT". AGAINST BIOGRAPHICAL CRITICISM, AUTHORIAL INTENTIONALITY, SUBJECTIVE "OPINION", LITERATURE IN THE SERVICE OF MORAL DIDACTICISM AND ETHICAL IMPERATIVES.] 9/5/23

***The New Criticism posits that every text is autonomous. History, biography, sociology, psychology, author's intention and reader's private experience are all irrelevant. Any attempt to look at the author's relationship to a work is called "the intentional fallacy." Any attempt to look at the reader's individual response is called "the affective fallacy."

[THE TEXT IS SELF-CONTAINED, AUTONOMOUS, LITERARY "FORM".] 9/5/23

New Criticism argues that each text has a central unity. The responsibility of the reader is to discover this unity. The reader's job is to interpret the text, telling in what ways each of its parts contributes to the central unity. The primary interest is in themes. A text is spoken by a persona (narrator or speaker) who expresses an attitude which must be defined and who speaks in a tone which helps define the attitude: ironic, straightforward or ambiguous. Judgements of the value of a text must be based on the richness of the attitude and the complexity and the balance of the text. The key phrases are ambivalence, ambiguity, tension, irony and paradox.

The reader's analysis of these elements lead him to an examination of the themes.

***A work is good or bad depending on whether the themes are complex and whether or not they contribute to the central, unifying theme. The more complex the themes are and the more closely they contribute to a central theme (unity) the better the work.

Usually, the New Critics define their themes as oppositions: Life and death, good and evil, love and hate, harmony and strife, order and disorder, eternity and time, reality and appearance, truth and falsehood, emotion and reason, simplicity and complexity, nature and art. The analysis of a text is an exercise in showing how all of its parts contribute to a complex but single (unified) statement about human problems.

[CENTRAL UNITY. CENTRAL UNIFIED STATEMENT WITH INTERNAL SPEAKER.] 9/5/23

The method the reader must use is "close analysis." The reader must look at the words, the syntax, the images, the structure (usually, "the argument"). The words must be understood to be ambiguous. (The more possible meanings a word has, the richer the ambiguity. The reader should search out irony (ambiguous meaning) and paradox (contradictory meaning, hence also ambiguity). The reader must discover tensions in the work. These will be the results of thematic oppositions, though they may also occur as oppositions in imagery: light versus dark, beautiful versus ugly, graceful versus clumsy. The oppositions may also be in the words chosen: concrete versus abstract, energetic versus placid).

[CLOSE READING, CLOSE TEXTUAL ANALYSIS.] 9/5/23

The reader must guard against two evils, stock responses ("autumn" should not make the reader sad unless the poem directs sadness at the thought of autumn) and idiosyncratic (affective) responses. ("Lush grass" should not make the reader think of cows however often he or she has seen cows in lush grass unless the poem clearly directs the reader to associate cows and lush grass. (See, Jonathon Culler, The Pursuit of Signs).

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

(1) New criticism definition.pdf [En Archivos]

(2) William K. Wimsatt, Jr. y Monroe Beardsley. "The Affective Fallacy". en The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1954. [orig. pub. 1946]

(3) Critical approaches: definition of New Criticism.The Blackwell Guide to Literary Theory. http://ekladata.com/C5BR0BB5KhPzyqRLS1xDelx9dhg/new-criticism.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<2> EL FORMALISMO RUSO.

LECTURA DE BASE PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

Viktor Shklovski. "El arte como artificio". Teoría de los formalistas rusos. Antología preparada y presentada por Tzvetan Todorov. México: Siglo XXI Editores, 1978. [orig. pub. 1919]

-------------. “Art as Technique.” Russian Formalist Criticism: Four Essays. Eds. Lee T. Lemon and Marion J. Reiss. Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 1965. 3-24.

[PUEDEN UTILIZAR LA VERSIÓN EN INGLÉS O LA VERSIÓN EN ESPAÑOL.]

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

(1) Russian Formalism. Overview. OXFORD REFERENCE. https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100434336

A school of literary theory and analysis that emerged in Russia around 1915, devoting itself to the study of literariness, i.e. the sum of ‘devices’ that distinguish literary language from ordinary language. In reaction against the vagueness of previous literary theories, it attempted a scientific description of literature (especially poetry) as a special use of language with observable features. This meant deliberately disregarding the contents of literary works, and thus inviting strong disapproval from Marxist critics, for whom formalism was a term of reproach. With the consolidation of Stalin's dictatorship around 1929, Formalism was silenced as a heresy in the Soviet Union, and its centre of research migrated to the Prague School in the 1930s. Along with ‘literariness’, the most important concept of the school was that of defamiliarization: instead of seeing literature as a ‘reflection’ of the world, Victor Shklovsky and his Formalist followers saw it as a linguistic dislocation, or a ‘making strange’. In the period of Czech Formalism, Jan Mukařovský further refined this notion in terms of foregrounding. In their studies of narrative, the Formalists also clarified the distinction between plot (sjuzet) and story (fabula). Apart from Shklovsky and his associate Boris Eikhenbaum, the most prominent of the Russian Formalists was Roman Jakobson, who was active both in Moscow and in Prague before introducing Formalist theories to the United States (see function). A somewhat distinct Russian group is the ‘Bakhtin school’ comprising Mikhail Bakhtin, Pavlev Medvedev, and Valentin Voloshinov; these theorists combined elements of Formalism and Marxism in their accounts of verbal multi-accentuality and of the dialogic text. Rediscovered in the West in the 1960s, the work of the Russian Formalists has had an important influence on structuralist theories of literature, and on some of the more recent varieties of Marxist literary criticism. For a fuller account, consult Peter Steiner, Russian Formalism (1984).

(2) Russian Formalism. BY NASRULLAH MAMBROL on OCTOBER 19, 2020. https://literariness.org/2020/10/19/russian-formalism/

Russian Formalism, a movement of literary criticism and interpretation, emerged in Russia during the second decade of the twentieth century and remained active until about 1930. Members of what can be loosely referred to as the Formalist school emphasized first and foremost the autonomous nature of literature and consequently the proper study of literature as neither a reflection of the life of its author nor as byproduct of the historical or cultural milieu in which it was created. In this respect, proponents of a formalist approach to literature attempted not only to isolate and define the “formal” properties of poetic language (in both poetry and prose) but also to study the way in which certain aesthetically motivated devices (e.g., defamiliarization [ostranenie]) determined the literariness or artfulness of an object.

From its inception, the Russian Formalist movement consisted of two distinct scholarly groups, both outside the academy: the Moscow Linguistic Circle, which was founded by the linguist Roman Jakobson in 1915 and included Grigorii Vinokur and Petr Bogatyrev, and the Petersburg OPOJAZ (Obščestvo izučenija POètičeskogo JAZyka, “Society for the Study of Poetic Language”), which came into existence a year later and was known for scholars such as Viktor Shklovsky, Iurii Tynianov, Boris Eikhenbaum, Boris Tomashevskii, and Victor Vinogradov. (It should be noted that the term “formalist” was initially applied pejoratively to the Moscow Linguistic Circle and OPOJAZ.) Although the leading figures in the Russian Formalist movement tended to disagree with one another on what constituted formalism, they were united in their attempt to move beyond the psychologism and biographism that pervaded nineteenth-century Russian literary scholarship.

[...] The Formalists consistently stressed the internal mechanics of the poetic work over the semantics of extraliterary systems, that is, politics, ideology, economics, psychology, and so on. Thus, Roman Jakobson’s 1921 analysis of futurist poet Velemir Khlebnikov, and especially his notion of the samovitoe slovo (“self-made word”) and zaum (“transrational language”), serves essentially to illustrate the proposition that poetry is an utterance directed toward “expression” (Noveishaia russkaia potziia [Recent Russian poetry]). Indeed, the futurist exploration of the exotic realm of zaum parallels the Formalist preoccupation with sound in poetic language at the phonemic level. In a similar way, essays such as Eikhenbaum’s “How Gogol’s ‘Overcoat’ Is Made” (1919, trans., 1978), which examined narrative devices and acoustic wordplay in the text without drawing any extraliterary, sociocultural conclusions, emphasized the autonomous, self-referential nature of verbal art. One of the most important of the devices Eikhenbaum described in that essay was skaz. Skaz, which in Russian is the root of the verb skazat’, “to tell,” may be compared to “free indirect discourse” (in German, erlebte Rede), which is marked by the grammar of third-person narration and the style, tone, and syntax of direct speech on the part of the character.

[...] Rejecting the subjectivism of nineteenth-century literary scholarship, the Formalists insisted that the study of literature be approached by means of a scientific and objective methodology.

[...] For Shklovsky, “literariness” is a function of the process of defamiliarization, which involves “estranging,” “slowing down,” or “prolonging” perception and thereby impeding the reader’s habitual, automatic relation to objects, situations, and poetic form itself (see “Art” 12). According to Shklovsky, the difficulty involved in the process is an aesthetic end in itself, because it provides a heightened sensation of life. Indeed, the process of “laying bare” the poetic device, such as the narrative self-reflexiveness of Laurence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy and its emphasis on the distinction between story and plot (see Theory of Prose), remained for Shklovsky one of the primary signs of artistic self-consciousness.

The notion that new literary production always involves a series of deliberate, self-conscious deviations from the poetic norms of the preceding genre and/or literary movement remained fundamental to Shklovsky’s and other Formalists’ theories of literary evolution. Tynianov’s and Jakobson’s notion of the “dominant” approximates Shklovsky’s emphasis on defamiliarization, albeit as a feature of the diachronic system, inasmuch as it demands that other devices in the poetic text be “transformed” or pushed to the background to allow for the “foregrounding” of the dominant device. The function of the dominant in the service of literary evolution included the replacement of canonical forms and genres by new forms, which in turn would become canonized and, likewise, replaced by still newer forms.

[...] Shklovsky’s 1930 denunciation of Formalism signaled not just that political pressures had worsened but that the de facto end of the Formalist movement had arrived. Even before Shklovsky was forced to abandon Formalism to political exigencies, the Moscow Linguistic Circle and OPOJAZ had already dissolved in the early 1920s, the former in 1920 with the departure of its founder, Roman Jakobson, for Czechoslovakia, the latter in 1923. With the banning of all artistic organizations (including the various associations of proletarian writers) and the introduction of “socialist realism” as the new, official socialist literature of the Soviet Union in 1932, the Russian Formalist movement came to an official close.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------ASIGNACIÓN PARA EL 13 DE SEPTIEMBRE-----------

PARA LA PREPARACIÓN DE LOS TEMAS QUE SE DISCUTIRÁN EN LA PRÓXIMA CLASE DEBERÁN CONSULTAR Y ANALIZAR LOS DOCUMENTOS DE BASE QUE SE INDICAN A CONTINUACIÓN:

TEMA (1): ENTRE EL FORMALISMO Y EL ESTRUCTURALISMO: Roman Jakobson: la poesía de la gramática y la gramática de la poesía.

ASIGNACIÓN 1:

*Leer y analizar los siguientes documentos. Identificar su propuesta principal (con sus argumentos, sus conceptos claves e ilustraciones de apoyo) y venir preparados para discutirla en clase. Estaremos discutiendo las primeras diez/quince páginas del primer artículo (=>hasta donde termina la explicación de la función "poética" del lenguaje). No tienen que leer el artículo completo.

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE:

A. Roman Jakobson. “Linguistics and Poetics”/ "Lingüística y poética". [EN LOS ARCHIVOS]

LOS CONCEPTOS DE JAKOBSON:

1) el esquema de la comunicación y los factores/aspectos del lenguaje. 2) las funciones del lenguaje, en especial, la función poética. 3) el eje de la selección <metáfora> / el eje de la combinación <metonimia>. 4) el principio de equivalencia / el principio de contigüidad.

------------------------------------

B. Roman Jakobson. "Two Aspects of Language".

LOS CONCEPTOS: sintagma/paradigma; metáfora/metonimia.

http://theory.theasintheas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/jakobson_Aphasia.pdf

-------------------------------------

C. Roman Jakobson y Claude Lévi-Strauss. "'Los gatos'" de Baudelaire". [EN LOS ARCHIVOS]

ASIGNACIÓN:

*Leer y analizar el documento anterior como ejemplo de lectura "formalista-estructural".

---------------------------------------

TRANSICIÓN:

TEXTUALIDADES [2]. INTRODUCCIÓN GENERAL ENLACE JAKOBSON - SAUSSURE - ESTRUCTURALISMO: "Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism. Rivkin/Ryan" y "The linguistic turn. J. Culler"

-------------------------------------

TEMA (2): EL PARADIGMA LINGÜÍSTICO-ESTRUCTURALISTA: Ferdinand de Saussure.

DOCUMENTO DE BASE:

Curso de lingüística general (selecciones - páginas en las que aparecen las definiciones de los conceptos).

en español:

http://fba.unlp.edu.ar/lenguajemm/?wpfb_dl=59

en inglés:

https://archive.org/stream/courseingenerall00saus/courseingenerall00saus_djvu.txt

[PUEDEN UTILIZAR LA VERSIÓN EN INGLÉS O LA VERSIÓN EN ESPAÑOL DE LA LECTURA ANTERIOR.]

ASIGNACIÓN:

*Buscar las definiciones de los conceptos medulares del Curso de lingüística general para discutirlos en la próxima clase. No hay que leer el libro completo.

LOS CONCEPTOS MEDULARES DE FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE:

1) langue (lengua)/parole (habla) 2) signo 3) significante/significado 4) sincronía/diacronía 5) relaciones sintagmáticas/relaciones asociativas 6) la arbitrariedad del signo 7) el valor del signo 8) mutabilidad/inmutabilidad del signo 9) el carácter lineal del significante 10) sistema 11) la semiología 12) Fíjense también en el uso del ejemplo del juego de ajedrez.

***DOCUMENTO DE APOYO:

Esquema Saussure.jpeg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13 DE SEPTIEMBRE - SESIÓN 5

COMENZAREMOS LA CLASE CON UN REPASO DE LOS FORMALISTAS RUSOS.

Para este repaso añadimos aquí citas importantes del artículo de Boris EIKHENBAUM : "La teoría del 'Método Formal'"/"The theory of the 'Formal Method'”. Boris Mikhailovich Eikhenbaum. (1925-6)

[IN THE SPIRIT OF A MANIFESTO]

I y II

"The so-called formal method grew out of a struggle for a science of literature that would be both independent and factual; it is not the outgrowth of a particular methodology. The notion of a method has been so exaggerated that it now suggests too much. In principle the question for the Formalist is not how to study literature, but what the subject matter of literary study actually is. We neither discuss methodology nor quarrel about it. We speak and may speak only about theoretical principles suggested to us not by this or that ready-made methodology, but by the examination of specific material in its specific context. [THE SPECIFICITY OF WHAT IS "LITERARY" IN LITERATURE] The Formalists’ works in literary theory and literary history show this clearly enough, but during the past ten years so many new questions and old misunderstandings have accumulated that I feel it advisable to try to summarize some of our work—not as a dogmatic system but as a historical summation. I wish to show how the work of the Formalists began, how it evolved, and what it involved into.

The evolutionary character of the development of the formal method is important to an understanding of its history; our opponents and many of our followers overlook it. We are surrounded by eclectics and latecomers who would turn the formal method into some kind of inflexible formalistic system in order to provide themselves with a working vocabulary, a program, and a name. A program is a very handy thing for critics, but not at all characteristic of our method. Our scientific approach has had no such prefabricated program or doctrine, and has none. In our studies we value a theory only as a working hypothesis to help us discover and interpret facts; that is, we determine the validity of the facts and use them as the material of our research. We are not concerned with definitions, for which the latecomers thirst; nor do we build general theories, which so delight eclectics. We posit specific principles and adhere to them insofar as the material justifies them. If the material demands their refinements or change, we change or refine them. In this sense we are quite free from our own theories—as science must be free to the extent that theory and conviction are distinct. There is no ready-made science; science lives not by settling on truth, but by overcoming error.

Within the limits of this science, the most diverse methods may develop, if only because we focus on the empirical study of the material. Such study was, essentially, the aim of the Formalists from the very beginning, and precisely that was the significance of our quarrel with the old traditions. The name formal method, bestowed upon the movement and now firmly attached to it, may be tentatively understood as a historical term; it should not be taken as an accurate description of our work. Neither Formalism as an aesthetic theory nor methodology as a finished scientific system characterizes us; we are characterized only by the attempt to create an independent science of literature which studies specifically literary material. We ask only for recognition of the theoretical facts of literary art as such.

Before the appearance of the Formalists, academic research, quite ignorant of theoretical problems, made use of antiquated aesthetic, psychological, and historical axioms and had so lost sight of its proper subject that its very existence as a science had become illusory. [...]

The historical battle between the two generations [the Symbolists and the Formalists]—a battle which was fought over principles and was extraordinarily intense— was therefore resolved in the journals, and the battle line was drawn over Symbolist theory and Impressionistic criticism rather than over any work being done by the Academicians. We entered the fight against the Symbolists in order to wrest poetics from their hands—to free it from its ties with their subjective philosophical and aesthetic theories and to direct it toward the scientific investigation of facts. We were raised on their works, and we saw their errors with the greatest clarity. At this time, the struggle became even more urgent because the Futurists (Khlebnikov, Kruchenykh, and Mayakovsky), who were on the rise, opposed the Symbolist poetics and supported the Formalists.

The original group of Formalists was united by the idea of liberating poetic diction from the fetters of the intellectualism and moralism which more and more obsessed the Symbolists. The dissension among the Symbolist theoreticians (1910– 11) and the appearance of the Acmeists prepared the way for our decisive rebellion. We knew that all compromises would have to be avoided, that history demanded of us a really revolutionary attitude—a categorical thesis, merciless irony, and bold rejections of whatever could not be reconciled with our position. We had to oppose the subjective aesthetic principles espoused by the Symbolists with an objective consideration of the facts. Hence our Formalist movement was characterized by a new passion for scientific positivism—a rejection of philosophical assumptions, of psychological and aesthetic interpretations, etc. Art, considered apart from philo- sophical aesthetics and ideological theories, dictated its own position on things. We had to turn to facts and, abandoning general systems and problems, to begin “in the middle,” with the facts which art forced upon us. Art demanded that we approach it closely; science, that we deal with the specific.

The establishment of a specific and factual literary science was basic to the organization of the formal method. [...] In rejecting these other approaches, the Formalists actually rejected and still reject not the methods, but rather the irresponsible mixing of various disciplines and their problems. The basis of our position was and is that the object of literary science, as such, must be the study of those specifics which distinguish it from any other material. (The secondary, incidental features of such material, however, may reasonably and rightly be used in a subordinate way by other scientific disciplines) Roman Jakobson formulated this view with perfect clarity:

The object of the science of literature is not literature, but literariness [literaturnost]—that is, that which makes a given work a work of literature. Until now literary historians have preferred to act like the policeman who, intending to arrest a certain person, would, at any opportunity, seize any and all persons who chanced into the apartment, as well as those who passed along the street. The literary historians used everything— anthropology, psychology, politics, philosophy. Instead of a science of literature, they created a conglomeration of homespun disciplines—the history of philosophy, the history of culture, of psychology, etc.—and that these could rightly use literary masterpieces only as defective, secondary documents.

To apply and strengthen this principle of specificity and to avoid speculative aesthetics, we had to compare literary facts with other kinds of facts, extracting from a limitless number of important orders of fact that order which would pertain to literature and would distinguish it from the others by its function.

This was the method Leo Jakubinsky followed in his essays in the first Opoyaz collection, in which he worked out the contrast between poetic and practical language that served as the basic principle of the Formalists’ work on key problems of poetics. As a result, the Formalists did not look, as literary students usually had, towards history, culture, sociology, psychology, or aesthetics, etc., but toward linguistics, a science bordering on poetics and sharing material with it, but approaching it from a different perspective and with different problems. Linguistics, for its part, was also interested in the formal method in that what was discovered by comparing poetic and practical language could be studied as a purely linguistic problem, as part of the general phenomena of language.

Leo Jakubinskty’s first essay, On the Sounds of Poetic Language, compared practical and poetic language and formulated the difference between them:

The phenomena of language must be classified from the point of view of the speaker’s particular purpose as he forms his own linguistic pattern. If the pattern is formed for the purely practical purpose of communication, then we are dealing with a system of practical language (the language of thought) in which the linguistic pattern (sounds, morphological features, etc.) have no independent value and are merely a means of communication. But other linguistic systems, systems in which the practical purpose is in the background (although perhaps not entirely hidden) are conceivable; they exist, and their linguistic patterns acquire independent value.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

EL RESTO DE LA CLASE SE DEDICA A ROMAN JAKOBSON.

TEMA ÚNICO: ENTRE EL FORMALISMO Y EL ESTRUCTURALISMO: Roman Jakobson: la poesía de la gramática y la gramática de la poesía.

DOCUMENTOS DE BASE:

A. Roman Jakobson. “Linguistics and Poetics”/ "Lingüística y poética". [EN LOS ARCHIVOS]

LOS CONCEPTOS DE JAKOBSON:

------------------------------------

B. Roman Jakobson. "Two Aspects of Language".

LOS CONCEPTOS: sintagma/paradigma; metáfora/metonimia.

http://theory.theasintheas.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/jakobson_Aphasia.pdf

-------------------------------------

C. Roman Jakobson y Claude Lévi-Strauss. "'Los gatos'" de Baudelaire". [EN LOS ARCHIVOS]

---------------------------------------

TRANSICIÓN:

TEXTUALIDADES [2]. INTRODUCCIÓN GENERAL ENLACE JAKOBSON - SAUSSURE - ESTRUCTURALISMO: "Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism. Rivkin/Ryan" y "The linguistic turn. J. Culler"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20 DE SEPTIEMBRE - SESIÓN 6 - SE DARÁ EN LÍNEA EL 22 DE SEPTIEMBRE A LAS 4:30PM

TEMA ÚNICO: EL ESTRUCTURALISMO COMO CIENCIA PILOTO PARA EL ESTUDIO DE LAS CIENCIAS HUMANAS: Trasfondo para la narratología “clásica”, de corte estructuralista.

------------ASIGNACIÓN--------------

(1) SAUSSURE

(2) BARTHES

(3) REFLEXIÓN

--------------------------------------

1> EL PARADIGMA LINGÜÍSTICO-ESTRUCTURALISTA: Ferdinand de Saussure. Discusión de los conceptos medulares de Ferdinand de Saussure. [NO SE CUBRIÓ EN LA CLASE ANTERIOR]

LOS CONCEPTOS DE FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE:

LECTURA DE BASE PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

Ferdinand de Saussure. Curso de lingüística general (selecciones).

(1) F. de Saussure. Curso de lingüística general (selecciones - páginas en las que aparecen las definiciones de los conceptos).

español:

http://fba.unlp.edu.ar/lenguajemm/?wpfb_dl=59

inglés:

https://archive.org/stream/courseingenerall00saus/courseingenerall00saus_djvu.txt

(2) Esquema Saussure.jpeg

---------------------------------------------------------

2> LA ACTIVIDAD ESTRUCTURALISTA: A partir del artículo de Roland Barthes. “The Structuralist activity”/ "La actividad estructuralista".

LECTURA DE BASE PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

Roland Barthes. “The Structuralist activity”/ "La actividad estructuralista". LAS DOS VERSIONES DE ESTE ARTÍCULO SE ENCUENTRAN EN EL ARCHIVO AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA.

http://estudiosliterariosunrn.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/barthes-roland-ensayos-criticos.pdf

***Este es el enlace del libro completo en el que se publicó este ensayo. El ensayo "La actividad estructuralista" se encuentra en la página 293.

-------------------------------------------------

--- 3> REFLEXIÓN [Ada M. Vilar] -- [COMO APOYO A LA LECTURA DEL ARTÍCULO DE BARTHES]

RECAPITULACIÓN CONCEPTUAL DEL ESPÍRITU DEL ESTRUCTURALISMO SAUSSURIANO Y DE LA ACTIVIDAD ESTRUCTURALISTA DE ROLAND BARTHES

Cada vez que uno está ante un llamado objeto/fenómeno complejo “natural” o “fabricado” [=hecho por el hombre ("man-made")], que se da como un todo, como un conjunto unido cuyos componentes/elementos constitutivos se captan de una sola tirada, en su simultaneidad y se nos pide que lo estudiemos, que digamos lo que vemos, que lo describamos o que lo analicemos, ¿qué hacer? ¿Cómo proceder? ¿Qué operaciones solemos emprender cuando se quiere comprender, describir, captar un fenómeno o un objeto como conjunto?

En general, y este es el método llamado científico, solemos descomponerlo, solemos separar, dividir, desligar lo que se nos da de forma unida, para, de esta manera, poder identificar/definir los elementos constitutivos y ver las relaciones que unen esos elementos, para ver cómo se conectan para formar el producto unificado con el que comenzamos. En otras palabras, cómo procedemos cuando queremos comprender algo, cuando queremos acceder al sentido de las cosas.

***Y esto es lo más importante:

(1) Para efectuar estas operaciones de identificación, definición y eventual interconexión de elementos, de aquello que le da sentido a las cosas, adoptamos, como punto de partida consciente o inconscientemente, lo que se llama un PRINCIPIO DE CLASIFICACIÓN, una decisión inicial, un punto de vista que dirige/organiza la manera en que se identifica, procesa, describe ese objeto desde sus componentes elementales hasta sus interrelaciones más complejas.

(2) En otras palabras, este principio de clasificación metodológico, que no es otra cosa que una construcción lógica creada por el intelecto (y compuesta de conceptos analíticos) que se utilizan para comprender/describir un objeto: este principio y la metodología a la que da paso, a medida que se va desarrollando, va creando el objeto que está describiendo. Esto hace que se pueda decir que el objeto y la manera en que se va describiendo coincidan. Sin embargo, el objeto "descrito" y el objeto “inicial”, anterior a la conceptualización, NO coinciden, NO son el mismo objeto. El punto de vista de la descripción, el principio de clasificación es lo que crea el objeto “descrito” por la descripción y el análisis (¡valga la tautología!). La mirada conceptual que se arroja sobre el objeto es la que crea dicho objeto. Esto significa que el método de acercamiento/el método de descripción y análisis y el llamado objeto de la mirada coinciden. El método constituye el objeto. El llamado “objeto” es pues el fruto de la definición, de la descripción, de la construcción metodológica mental.

***Según esta manera de concebir el “estar-del-ser-humano-en-el-mundo" o la relación del ser humano con el mundo, el ser humano no tiene acceso directo al mundo. Todo lo que el ser humano conoce es lo que el ser humano pasa por principios de clasificación, por procesos de razonamiento, por maneras de ver y de concebir. El ser humano tiene acceso solo a lo que procesa mentalmente. NUESTRO CONOCIMIENTO DEL MUNDO PASA POR EL FILTRO/LA MEDIACIÓN DE NUESTRO INTELECTO, POR PROCESOS DE INTELIGIBILIDAD. NUESTRO INTELECTO ES LO QUE PRODUCE NUESTRO CONOCIMIENTO DEL MUNDO. ES LO QUE HACE EL MUNDO INTELIGIBLE. El mundo para el ser humano no es otra cosa que aquello que es inteligible para él, aquello que SIGNIFICA para él. De acuerdo con esta visión del ser humano, hay una distancia [“gap” en inglés] insuperable y tajante entre el hombre y el llamado mundo “exterior” o “natural”.

Esta es la manera estructuralista de ver la relación entre la humanidad y el mundo. En este sentido, el estructuralismo adopta como proyecto la descripción y el análisis de aquello (=las operaciones mentales) que le permite al ser humano hacer su mundo inteligible, comprensible, significante.

Y ADOPTA LA LINGÜÍSTICA SAUSURIANA COMO LA CIENCIA PILOTO QUE PROVEE LA MATRIZ, EL MODELO DESCRIPTIVO DE BASE QUE PERMITE DES-CUBRIR [=destapar, sacar a la luz] ESTE PROCESO.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------ASIGNACIÓN PARA EL 27 DE SEPTIEMBRE-----------

(0) REPASO: INTRODUCCIÓN GENERAL ENLACE JAKOBSON - SAUSSURE - ESTRUCTURALISMO: "Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism. Rivkin/Ryan" y "The linguistic turn. J. Culler". ***ESTAS DOS INTRODUCCIONES SE ENCUENTRAN JUNTAS EN UN SOLO DOCUMENTO WORD EN EL ARCHIVO AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***TEMA (ÚNICO: ESTRUCTURALISMO y NARRACIÓN I: Comienzos de la narratología “clásica”, de corte estructuralista. Para estudiar la lengua de la narración (=el sistema, los universales, los denominadores comunes de la narración, las convenciones generales compartidas por toda narración). La reflexión lingüístico-teórica estructuralista y sus implicaciones para el análisis de textos narrativos.

<1> LECTURA COMÚN PRINCIPAL: LAS DOS VERSIONES DE ESTE ARTÍCULO SE ENCUENTRAN EN EL ARCHIVO AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA.

Roland Barthes. “Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative”/ “Introducción al análisis estructural de los relatos.”

inglés: http://www.uv.es/fores/Barthes_Structural_Narrative.pdf

------------------------------

<2> ESQUEMAS DE APOYO PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

ESQUEMAS CREADOS A PARTIR DE ARTÍCULOS DE: R. BARTHES, E. BENVENISTE, A. GREIMAS, E. SOURIAU, V. PROPP. [EN EL ARCHIVO AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

27 DE SEPTIEMBRE - SESIÓN 7

***SE DEDICARÁ LA CLASE A ROLAND BARTHES Y LA NARRATOLOGÍA "clásica", de corte estructuralista.

ESTRUCTURALISMO y NARRACIÓN I: Roland Barthes. “Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative”/ “Introducción al análisis estructural de los relatos.”Comienzos de la narratología “clásica”, de corte estructuralista. Para estudiar la lengua de la narración (=el tronco común, las convenciones comunes, etc.). El modelo lingüístico-teórico estructuralista y sus implicaciones para el análisis de textos narrativos.

ORGANIZACIÓN DEL TRABAJO:

(1) BREVE REPASO DEL FORMALISMO RUSO Y JAKOBSON.

CONCEPTOS Y ASUNTOS CLAVES:

la "literaturidad"[=literaturnost] de la literatura [=percepción/valor/función verbal];
la lengua "poética"/literaria [=valor/función/percepción/orientación en sí misma, valor independiente] vs la lengua "cotidiana"/prosaica [=valor/función/orientación de comunicación];
identidad/definición "diferencial" y "relacional" vs identidad/definición "esencial"/plena/"en sí";
los dos ejes del lenguaje: eje paradigmático [=de la selección/equivalencia/sustitución <metáfora>] y eje sintagmático [de la combinación/contigüidad <metonimia>];
la "función poética" entre las otras funciones del lenguaje [=hay "poeticidad"/"literaturidad"/arte verbal cuando la función poética es la función dominante del discurso];
el "arte" como artificio no-realista, no-referencial [=conjunto de recursos/técnicas/"devices" des-familiarizadores, auto-referenciales, creadores de ostranenie]

---------------------------

(2) REPASO: FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE : LA LINGÜÍSTICA COMO CIENCIA PILOTO DEL ESTRUCTURALISMO.

LOS CONCEPTOS DE FERDINAND DE SAUSSURE:

---------------------------------

(3) REPASO: TRANSICIÓN: ENLACE SAUSSURE - ESTRUCTURALISMO: "Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism. Rivkin/Ryan" y "The linguistic turn. J. Culler".

(4) REPASO: "La actividad estructuralista" de Roland Barthes: Trasfondo para la narratología “clásica”, de corte estructuralista Y REFLEXIÓN.

----------------------------------------------

TEMA CENTRAL DE LA CLASE: ESTRUCTURALISMO y NARRACIÓN I: Comienzos de la narratología “clásica”, de corte estructuralista. Para estudiar la lengua de la narración (=el tronco común, las convenciones comunes, etc.). El modelo lingüístico-teórico estructuralista y sus implicaciones para el análisis de textos narrativos.

LECTURA COMÚN:

Roland Barthes. “Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative”/ “Introducción al análisis estructural de los relatos.” LAS DOS VERSIONES DE ESTE ARTÍCULO SE ENCUENTRAN EN EL ARCHIVO AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA.

inglés: http://www.uv.es/fores/Barthes_Structural_Narrative.pdf

------------------------------

DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO:

ESQUEMAS CREADOS A PARTIR DE ARTÍCULOS DE: R. BARTHES, E. BENVENISTE, A. GREIMAS, E. SOURIAU, V. PROPP. [EN LOS ARCHIVOS AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 DE OCTUBRE - SESIÓN 8

ORGANIZACIÓN DE LA CLASE

(1) Presentación y discusión en torno a los conceptos de "mediación" y de "narratividad" en la narratología clásica, de corte estructuralista, segunda parte: el marco conceptual narratológico para estudiar el "habla" de la narración (=narraciones individuales, singulares) a partir de los incisos en el curso en línea de Manfred Jahn y en el living handbook of narratology.

(2) Presentación y discusión en torno a los conceptos de "VOZ", "nivel narrativo", "narrador" y "metalepsis" a partir de los incisos correspondientes en el curso en línea de Manfred Jahn, el living handbook of narratology y el *ESQUEMA NARRACION - NIVELES Y VOZ.JPG.

(3) Presentación y discusión en torno al concepto de "FOCALIZACIÓN" a partir de los incisos correspondientes en el curso en línea de Manfred Jahn, el living handbook of narratology y los *ESQUEMAS correspondientes.

(4) Presentación y discusión en torno a los conceptos de NARRATARIO a partir de los incisos correspondientes en el curso en línea de Manfred Jahn, el living handbook of narratology y el ESQUEMA correspondiente.

***Estos se estudiarán en el relato de Julio Cortázar "Continuidad de los Parques" y "Cat Person" de Kristen Roupenian. El relato "Continuidad de los parques" se encuentra en el enlace a continuación o más abajo en esta misma página. El relato "Cat Person" se encuentra en un enlace al New Yorker en la parte "D." de la página de DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO.

https://ciudadseva.com/texto/continuidad-de-los-parques/

Julio Cortázar. "Continuidad de los parques". [Cuento - Texto completo.]. En Final del juego, 1956.

--------------------------------------------

---------ASIGNACIÓN PARA EL 4 DE OCTUBRE-----------

PARA LA PREPARACIÓN DE LOS TEMAS QUE SE DISCUTIRÁN EN ESTA CLASE DEBERÁN CONSULTAR Y ANALIZAR LOS DOCUMENTOS DE BASE QUE SE INDICAN A CONTINUACIÓN:

II. ESTRUCTURALISMO Y NARRACIÓN II: La narratología “clásica”, de corte estructuralista, segunda parte. Para estudiar el habla de la narración (=narraciones individuales, singulares).

***DOCUMENTOS DE BASE PARA EL ESTUDIO DEL MARCO CONCEPTUAL NARRATOLÓGICO Y DE LOS ELEMENTOS CONSTITUTIVOS DEL TEXTO NARRATIVO:

(1) Jahn, Manfred. 2021. Narratology 2.3: A Guide to the Theory of Narrative. English Department, University of Cologne. June 2021. URL www.uni-koeln.de/~ame02/pppn.pdf

Project page: www.uni-koeln.de/~ame02/ppp.htm Homepage: www.uni-koeln.de/~ame02/

***This tutorial offers a toolbox of basic narratological concepts, approaches, and models, and shows how to put it to work in the analysis of fiction.

LO ENCONTRARÁN TAMBIÉN AL PIE DE LA PÁGINA "PROGRAMA/SÍLABO DEL CURSO".

------------------

(2) the living handbook of narratology (LHN)

http://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/

Why is the LHN called a living handbook?

The living handbook of narratology (LHN) is based on the Handbook of Narratology, first published by Walter de Gruyter in 2009. From May 2009 to April 2013, the LHN was hosted and maintained by Hamburg University Press. This Wiki-based version remains preserved under the date April 30, 2013, and is further accessible at: http://wikis.sub.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/index.php/Main_Page. Since May 1, 2013, the LHN appears in a new design, based on a DRUPAL-CMS installation.

As an open access publication, it makes available all of the 32 articles contained in the original print version—and more: the LHN offers the additional functionality of electronic publishing including full text search facility, one-click-export of reference data and digital humanities tools for text analysis.

The LHN continuously expands its original content base by adding new articles on concepts and theories fundamental to narratology and to the study of narrative in general. It offers registered narratologists the opportunity to comment on existing articles, suggest additions or corrections, and submit new articles to the editors.

------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Mark Currie. "Introduction: Narratology, Death and Afterlife." Postmodern Narrative Theory (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998): 1-14.

David Darby. "Form and Context: An Essay in the History of Narratology." Poetics Today 22.4 (2001): 829-852.

David Herman. "Introduction: Narratologies." Narratologies: New Perspectives on Narrative Analysis. Ed. by D. Herman. (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State U. Press, 1999): 1-30.

Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan. "Introduction." Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics (London & N.Y: Methuen, 2002): 1-5.

----------------------------------. "Towards… Afterthoughts, almost twenty years later." Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics (London & N.Y: Methuen, 2002): 134-149.

Jan Christoph Meister, Tom Kindt, Wilhelm Schernus (editors). Narratology Beyond Literary Criticism: Mediality and Disciplinarity. (New York: Walter de Gruyter, Inc., 2005).

David Herman, Manfred Jahn, Marie-Laure Ryan (editors). The Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory. (New York: Routledge, 2005).

John Pier and José Ángel García Landa (editors). Theorizing Narrativity. (New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2008).

Gerald Prince. "Narratology. Definition." The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism. Ed. by Michael Groden and Martin Kreiswirth.

http://www.press.jhu.edu/books/hopkins_guide_to_literary_theory/narratology.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMA (1): INTRODUCCIÓN Y PRIMERAS DEFINICIONES. EL MARCO GENERAL. Conceptos de mediación y narratividad.

LECTURAS COMUNES:

***Jahn 1.2, 1.7, *2. (The narratological framework) [2.1.1. - 2.3.5.]

BASIC CONCEPTS:

narratology: To investigate a structure, or to present a 'structural description', the narratologist dissects the narrative phenomena into their component parts and then attempts to determine functions and relationships.

mediation = fictional communication
mediacy = mode of communication or transmission
levels of narrative communication or the "Chinese-box" model":

AUTHOR -> READER [LEVEL OF EXTRA-FICTIONAL COMMUNICATION]

NARRATOR -> NARRATEE [LEVEL OF INTRA-FICTIONAL COMMUNICATION]

CHARACTER -> CHARACTER [LEVEL OF ACTION]

narrative / narration / story
narrative situations [Stanzel]
narratological framework: WHO narrates/"tells" WHAT HOW?

-------------------------------

[STANZEL'S MODEL:]

The term “mediacy” was coined by Stanzel ([1955] 1971: 6) and describes the fact that the story is mediated by the narrator’s discourse in one of two ways. Either the story is openly transmitted through a narrator who functions as a teller of the tale (“teller mode”) or the mediation is apparently occluded by a direct, immediate presentation of the story through the consciousness of a reflector (character). In the reflector mode, we seem to see the storyworld through the eyes of a character and there seems to be no narrator operating as a mediator. Since the introduction of Stanzel’s term, the fact of a mediate presentation of the story has become a general foundation in structuralist narratology.

Stanzel regards the three narrative situations (first-person, authorial, and figural) as descriptions of basic possibilities of theorizing narration as mediacy.

[GENETTE'S MODEL: "who speaks?=>voice VS "who sees? => focalization/perspective]

Genette considers Stanzel’s category of mode to be superfluous, as he finds it “easily reducible to our common category of perspective” ([1983] 1988: 116). In his view, Stanzel’s distinction between teller- and reflector-characters confuses the question of voice, or, more precisely, person (“who speaks?”) with that of mood or, more precisely, perspective (“who sees?”). He thus revises Cohn’s amendment of Stanzel by proposing a different taxonomy which “diversifies an initial typology that was [...] altogether too limited to the most frequent situations” (119).

Genette’s model is based on the cross-tabulation of heterodiegetic and homodiegetic forms of narrating/voice (“who speaks?”) and the three types of focalization (zero, internal, external) (“who sees?”) (21; [1972] 1980: 189–94, 245). Genette considers this taxonomy to be an improvement because it is more systematic and includes less common narrative forms such as Hemingway’s “The Killers,” a form of heterodiegetic narration with external focalization (the neutral subtype in Stanzel ([1955] 1971:93), and Camus’ L’Étranger, a form of homodiegetic narration with external focalization.

----------

STANZEL: mediacy

GENETTE: narrating act and narrative; story/narrative/narrating (act)

RIMMON-KENAN: story/text/narration

BAL: fabula/text/story

Stanzel’s mediacy is equivalent to what Genette calls “narrating act” and “narrative.” More specifically, Genette discriminates between “story (the totality of the narrated events), narrative (the discourse, oral or written, that narrates them), and narrating (the real or fictive act that produces that discourse—in other words, the very fact of recounting)” ([1983] 1988: 13). In this model, the narrating act shapes and transforms the story through the narrative discourse. Similarly, Rimmon-Kenan uses the terms story, text, and narration ([1983] 2002: 3), while Bal modifies Genette’s terminology by arguing that it is by way of the text that the reader has access to the story, of which the fabula is a memorial trace that remains with the reader after the reading ([1985] 1997: 5).

“Mediacy and Narrative Mediation”. the living handbook of narratology.

***Jan Alber. Monika Fludernik. Created: 8. June 2011 Revised: 22. April 2014.

https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/28.html

--------------------------------

"Narrativity." the living handbook of narratology. H. Porter Abbott. Created: 13. August 2011 Revised: 20. January 2014

sequentiality, consecutiveness [linearity + causality]

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/27.html

LECTURA DE APOYO:

F.K. Stanzel. "Mediacy of Presentation as the Generic Characteristic of Narration." A Theory of Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press, 1984: 4-21.

------------------------------------------------------------------

TEMA (2): EL MARCO NARRATOLÓGICO CLÁSICO [THE NARRATOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK].

A. Problemas de narración I: Voz [narrador], niveles de la narración, metalepsis y representaciones discursivas.

1.32. Outline of major concepts introduced in the first part of Jahn, Manfred. 2021. Narratology 2.3: A Guide to the Theory of Narrative.

A. Narrative voice 1.3

1) Who speaks? 1.3, 1.18

2) expressivity markers, 1.4

3) overt/covert voice distinction, 1.9 4) how to hide a voice, 1.9, 1.17

B. Internal focalization 1.16, 1.24 1) Who sees? 1.18

2) internal focalizer/reflector, 1.18 3) FID/IF test 1.23, 1.24, 8.6

C. Basic types and typical narrative situations

1) Genette's basic types

a) homodiegetic, 1.10, 1.20

b) heterodiegetic, 1.10, 1.21, 1.28

2) Stanzel's narrative situations (3.3.1) a) first-person, 1.11

b) authorial, 1.13, 1.20

c) figural, 1.18, 1.20, 1.26

LECTURA COMUNES:

Jahn 1.9. - 1.33, 2.4. (Narrative levels) [2.4.1. - 2.4.7.], 3.1.[3.1.1. - 3.1.10.].

--------------------------

"Narrator." the living handbook of narratology. Uri Margolin. Created: 23. May 2012. Revised: 26. January 2014.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/44.html

-------------------------

narrative levels: hierarchical levels of control and containment.

levels of narrative communication or the "Chinese-box" model":

AUTHOR -> READER [LEVEL OF EXTRA-FICTIONAL COMMUNICATION]

NARRATOR -> NARRATEE [LEVEL OF INTRA-FICTIONAL COMMUNICATION]

CHARACTER -> CHARACTER [LEVEL OF ACTION]

"Narrative Levels." John Pier. (revised version; uploaded 23 April 2014). Created: 4. August 2011 Revised: 10. October 2016.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/32.html

------------------------

metalepsis: a transgression of levels.

mise en abyme: the infinite loop created when a hypo-narrative embeds its matrix narrative. a mirror-effect,

"Metalepsis." John Pier. (revised version; uploaded 13 July 2016). Created: 11. June 2011 Revised: 14. July 2016.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/51.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS Y CONCEPTOS:

Voz, narrador, funciones del narrador, niveles de la narración y metalepsis, tipología de narradores: por nivel que ocupa: extradiegético, intradiegético, metadiegético o hipodiegético; por grado de participación en la historia o presencia/ausencia de la historia: heterodiegético, homodiegético, autodiegético; persona: narración en primera, segunda, tercera persona; criterio de confiabilidad: narrador confiable (“reliable”) vs narrador desconfiable (“unreliable”); grado de perceptibilidad: encubierto vs descubierto ("covert vs overt narrators"); relaciones de temporalidad entre narración e historia : distancia, duración; relaciones de subordinación entre narración e historia: nivel extradiegético, intradiegético, hipodiegético (función: accional, temática, explicativa, obstruccionista, retardataria, contrastiva, analógica, etc.).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/66.html

"Unreliability." Dan Shen. Created: 27. June 2011 Revised: 31. December 2013.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/58.html

"Implied Author". Wolf Schmid. Created: 26. January 2013 Revised: 16. May 2014.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS COMUNES (2):

Jahn 8[8.1 - 8.13]

ESQUEMAS PARA LA DISCUSION DE VOZ:

Esquema "Narración: niveles y voces." [adaptado de Sh. Rimmon-Kenan]

Esquema "Modos de (re)producción del discurso y del pensamiento de personajes en el relato literario escrito."

Esquema "Voz." [adapt. de G. Genette]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS Y CONCEPTOS:

Representaciones discursivas: discurso directo, discurso indirecto, discurso indirecto libre (FID), "erlebte rede", "dual voice", discurso por sustitución (DS), monólogo interior, "stream of consciousness", el sico-relato, el monólogo relatado; deícticos, comentario, resumen.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Gérard Genette. "Narrative of Words." "Perspective." y "Voice." en Narrative Discourse: 169-185; 185-189; 212-259.

Mieke Bal. "Texto: palabras." en Teoría de la narrativa: 125-154.

Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan. "Narration: levels and voices." y "Narration: speech representations." en Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics: 86-105; 106-119.

Nilli Diengott. "Narrative Level and Participation as Criteria for a Typology of Narrators: A Reconsideration." YCGL 35 (1986): 51-55.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Problemas de narración II: Focalización.

LECTURAS COMUNES:

Jahn. 3.2. [3.2.1. - *3.2.34.]

--------------------------------

"Focalization." the living handbook of narratology. Burkhard Niederhoff. Created: 4. August 2011. Revised: 24. September 2013.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/18.html#:~:text=1Focalization%2C%20a%20term%20coined,hypothetical%20entities%20in%20the%20storyworld

ESQUEMAS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN SOBRE LA FOCALIZACIÓN:

Esquema "Los Anglo-sajones." [adapt. de P. Lubbock, N. Friedman, W. Booth] "Los Franceses." [adapt. de J. Pouillon, T. Todorov, G. Genette, M. Bal] "Facetas de la Focalización" / "Tipos de Focalización." [adapt. de S. Rimmon-Kenan]

Esquema "Descriptive poetics of point of view, Figure 21" [Susan Sniader Lanser. The Narrative Act.]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS Y CONCEPTOS:

Punto de vista, focalización, perspectiva, modo, “center of consciousness”, restricción de campo, visión, ‘post of observation”, filtro, “slant”, “interest-focus”.(a) La crítica anglo-sajona: Henry JAMES, Percy LUBBOCK, Brooks & Warren, Norman FRIEDMAN, Scholes & Kellog, Wayne BOOTH, Roger Fowler, Seymour CHATMAN, Susan Sniader Lanser.(b) La crítica de expresión francesa: Jean POUILLON, Georges Blin, Tzvetan TODOROV, Gerard GENETTE, Francoise Van Rossum-Guyon, Mieke BAL, Jaap Lintvelt.(c) La crítica alemana, checa, soviética e israelí: Leo Spitzer, F.K. STANZEL, L. Dolezel, B. Uspenski, Shlomith RIMMON-KENAN.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Gerard Genette: “Mood.” en Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method: 161-211.

Mieke Bal: “Focalización.” en Teoría de la narrativa: 107-123.

Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan: “Text: Focalization” en Narrative Fiction: 71-85.

William Nelles. “Getting Focalization into Focus.” Poetics Today 11, n’2 (Summer 1990): 365-82.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Problemas de narración III: Narratario.

LECTURA COMÚN:

"Narratee." the living handbook of narratology. Wolf Schmid. Created: 22. January 2013. Revised: 3. October 2013.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/60.html#:~:text=2The%20narratee%20is%20to,the%20addressee%20and%20the%20recipient.&text=All%20the%20actions%20that%20constitute,his%20image%20of%20his%20addressee

ESQUEMA PARA LA DISCUSION DE NARRATARIO:

Esquema "El narratario." [adapt. de G. Prince, M.A. Piwowarczyk y S. Rimmon-Kenan]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS Y CONCEPTOS:

Narratario, lector implícito, archilector, lector modelo; tipos: extradiégetico, intradiegético, metadiegético, heterodiegético, homodiegético; encubierto ("covert"), descubierto ("overt"), confiable, desconfiable.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan. "Narratees." en Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics: 103-105.

Gérard Genette. "The Narratee." en Narrative Discourse: 259-262.

Gerald Prince. "Introduction to the Study of the Narratee." en Reader-Response Criticism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, l980): 7-25. pub. orig. en francés: "Introduction à l'étude du narrataire", Poétique 14 (1973): 177-196.

Mary A. Piwowarczyk. "The Narratee and the Situation of Enunciation: A Reconsideration of Prince's Theory." Genre 9 (Summer l976): 161-77.

---------------------

***Se ilustrarán estos elementos/estas técnicas narrativas con ejemplos del relato breve de Julio Cortázar, "Continuidad de los parques" y "Cat Person" de Kristen Roupenian. El relato "Continuidad de los parques" se encuentra a continuación. El relato "Cat Person" se encuentra en un enlace al New Yorker en la parte "D." de la página de DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://ciudadseva.com/texto/continuidad-de-los-parques/

Continuidad de los parques

[Cuento - Texto completo.]

Julio Cortázar

Había empezado a leer la novela unos días antes. La abandonó por negocios urgentes, volvió a abrirla cuando regresaba en tren a la finca; se dejaba interesar lentamente por la trama, por el dibujo de los personajes. Esa tarde, después de escribir una carta a su apoderado y discutir con el mayordomo una cuestión de aparcerías, volvió al libro en la tranquilidad del estudio que miraba hacia el parque de los robles. Arrellanado en su sillón favorito, de espaldas a la puerta que lo hubiera molestado como una irritante posibilidad de intrusiones, dejó que su mano izquierda acariciara una y otra vez el terciopelo verde y se puso a leer los últimos capítulos. Su memoria retenía sin esfuerzo los nombres y las imágenes de los protagonistas; la ilusión novelesca lo ganó casi en seguida. Gozaba del placer casi perverso de irse desgajando línea a línea de lo que lo rodeaba, y sentir a la vez que su cabeza descansaba cómodamente en el terciopelo del alto respaldo, que los cigarrillos seguían al alcance de la mano, que más allá de los ventanales danzaba el aire del atardecer bajo los robles. Palabra a palabra, absorbido por la sórdida disyuntiva de los héroes, dejándose ir hacia las imágenes que se concertaban y adquirían color y movimiento, fue testigo del último encuentro en la cabaña del monte. Primero entraba la mujer, recelosa; ahora llegaba el amante, lastimada la cara por el chicotazo de una rama. Admirablemente restañaba ella la sangre con sus besos, pero él rechazaba las caricias, no había venido para repetir las ceremonias de una pasión secreta, protegida por un mundo de hojas secas y senderos furtivos. El puñal se entibiaba contra su pecho, y debajo latía la libertad agazapada. Un diálogo anhelante corría por las páginas como un arroyo de serpientes, y se sentía que todo estaba decidido desde siempre. Hasta esas caricias que enredaban el cuerpo del amante como queriendo retenerlo y disuadirlo, dibujaban abominablemente la figura de otro cuerpo que era necesario destruir. Nada había sido olvidado: coartadas, azares, posibles errores. A partir de esa hora cada instante tenía su empleo minuciosamente atribuido. El doble repaso despiadado se interrumpía apenas para que una mano acariciara una mejilla. Empezaba a anochecer.

Sin mirarse ya, atados rígidamente a la tarea que los esperaba, se separaron en la puerta de la cabaña. Ella debía seguir por la senda que iba al norte. Desde la senda opuesta él se volvió un instante para verla correr con el pelo suelto. Corrió a su vez, parapetándose en los árboles y los setos, hasta distinguir en la bruma malva del crepúsculo la alameda que llevaba a la casa. Los perros no debían ladrar, y no ladraron. El mayordomo no estaría a esa hora, y no estaba. Subió los tres peldaños del porche y entró. Desde la sangre galopando en sus oídos le llegaban las palabras de la mujer: primero una sala azul, después una galería, una escalera alfombrada. En lo alto, dos puertas. Nadie en la primera habitación, nadie en la segunda. La puerta del salón, y entonces el puñal en la mano, la luz de los ventanales, el alto respaldo de un sillón de terciopelo verde, la cabeza del hombre en el sillón leyendo una novela.

FIN

Final del juego, 1956

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RECORDATORIO TERMINOLÓGICO / CONCEPTUAL:

CLASSICAL NARRATOLOGY II : "The generative/production/compositionally-oriented perspective on narrative and narration, based on mediacy/mediation (= verbal narrative transmission vs in-mediacy) and the story/narrative discourse dichotomy or two-level structure. Classical narratology as the identification, description and classification of formal properties, constituting elements, and compositional relationships of/in narrative." [immanence]

"story" ["historia"] <an idealized chronological construct)> / "narrative discourse" ["narración"] <a representational system, a system of representing something, of “telling” something (=and that something is a story), a meaning-making, meaning-producing machine>.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

M.C. Escher. Drawing Hands. 1948.

video1534906605.mp4

11 DE OCTUBRE

ORGANIZACIÓN DE LA CLASE:

Comenzaremos la clase de hoy retomando el análisis de la situación de comunicación narrativa/marco narrativo (=narrador-voz narrativa/focalización/narratario) en "Continuidad de los Parques" y "Cat Person".
Luego, pasaremos al trabajo previsto para hoy: la presentación y explicación de los conceptos de personaje, descripción, espacio y tiempo. Nos concentramos en los primeros tres y los ilustraremos con los dos relatos.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOS SIGUIENTES ESQUEMAS SE ENCUENTRAN EN LOS ARCHIVOS AL PIE DE ESTA PÁGINA:

ESQUEMA "Tipos de indicadores textuales de caracterización." "Clasificación de personajes." [adaptado de Rimmon-Kenan]

ESQUEMA "Tipo de personajes según su realización y su situación en el relato." [adaptado de A. Greimas y P. Hamon]

Esquema 8. "La descripción." [adaptado de P. Hamon]

Esquema 9/10. "Espacio de la historia." y "Clasificación de Marcos Espaciales. - 3 páginas." [adaptado de R. Ronen]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------

(1) En el nivel de la historia (“story”) I: Personaje [“character”].

LECTURAS COMUNES:

Jahn. 7 [“Characters and characterization”].

----------------------------------

“Character.” the living handbook of narratology. Fotis Jannidis. Created: 6. December 2012 Revised: 14. September 2013.

http://lhn.sub.uni-hamburg.de/index.php/Character.html

ESQUEMAS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

ESQUEMA "Tipos de indicadores textuales de caracterización." "Clasificación de personajes." [adapt. de Rimmon-Kenan]

ESQUEMA "Tipo de personajes según su realización y su situación en el relato." [adapt. de A. Greimas y P. Hamon]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS:

Personaje, actor, actante, rol temático, agente, héroe, sujeto, función, modo de representación, "character", construcción, figura, tipologías, posición, paradigma de rasgos, extensión metonímica, representación metafórica, identidad, sistema nominativo, sistema apelativo, sistema vestimentario, inscripción espacio-temporal, inscripción sico-socio-económico-ideológica, "round" vs "flat", el "ser" vs el "hacer", la gramática del retrato: léxico, jerarquía, equivalencia, descripción, actos, relaciones, modalidades.

(a) orientaciones lógico-gramático-funcionales ("actanciales", "narratológicas"): desde Aristóteles, pasando por Polti y Souriau, los Formalistas rusos, Vladimir Propp y los Estructuralistas (Barthes, Greimas, Bremond, Todorov en Comunicaciones #8) hasta encontrar su expresión más completa en los trabajos de la Escuela de Paris: Greimas y sus discípulos: P. Perron, R. LeHuenen y P. Hamon entre 1970 y 1980.

(b) orientaciones sicológicas o sociológicas ("referenciales"- "semánticas"): E.M. Forster, W.J. Harvey, Champigny, Edel, Mark Shorer, Marthe Robert, Michel Zéraffa, Meyerson, Fr. Mauriac, J-P Sartre, Annette Lavers, J.Hytier, G. Blin.

(c) orientaciones mixtas ("sico - socio - lingüísticas", "sico o socio-funcionales", "sico o socio-narrativas", "semántico-semióticas"): Roger Fowler, M. Halliday, Ch. Grivel, A.J. Greimas, Ph. Hamon, R. Barthes, M. Butor, G. Genette, M. Bajtin, P. Barbéris, L. Goldman, J. Kristeva, G. Lukacs, J. Leenhardt, N. Sarraute, J. Garvey, L. Bersani.]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

S. Chatman. "Story-Existents: Character." en Story and Discourse.

Mieke Bal. "Actores." y "De los actores a los personajes." en Teoría de la narrativa.

Sh. Rimmon-Kenan. "Story: characters." y "Text: characterization." en Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) En el nivel de la historia (“story”) II: Coordenadas espaciales y descripción.

LECTURAS COMUNES:

Jahn. N6 [“Setting and fictional space”].

----------------------------------------

Space.” the living handbook of narratology. Marie-Laure Ryan. Created: 13. January 2012. Revised: 22. April 2014.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/55.html

ESQUEMAS PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

Esquema 8. "La descripción." [adaptado de P. Hamon]

Esquema 9. "Espacio de la historia." [adaptado de R. Ronen]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS:

espacio del discurso, espacio de la historia; descripción; escala, tamaño, contorno, textura, densidad, luz, color, posición, distancia, claridad/oscuridad, líneas, formas, planos, sonidos, ritmo, selección, volumen, condensación, expansión, punto de vista; presentación directa, presentación indirecta; topología; "setting" vs. "frame"; espacios inaccesibles, distantes, secundarios, generalizados; espacio hipotético; autonomía, dependencia; bloque semántico, inserción, marcas específicas, fronteras y horizontes, aspectos, rasgos, propiedades, líneas de demarcación, interior/exterior, abierto/cerrado; espacio social: normas, sistema ético, códigos, público/privado; personal/impersonal; escenificación; espacio ambiental y/o atmosférico; espacio rural, espacio urbano; "lokal" vs. "raum"; espacio histórico; objetos y personajes; espacio familiar; espacio decorativo; trasfondo, primer plano; estereotipos, correspondencias, equivalencias; función:

caracterización de personajes, creación de ritmos narrativos, función temporal, función pictórica: hacer ver, verosimilitud, motivación realista; espacio sicológico, sueños, inconsciente; inventarios, representación gráfica, indicaciones geográficas; naturaleza y paisajes, ciudades, interiores, vestimentas y mobiliarios; distribución, encuadre, paralelismo, correlación, enumeración, acumulación, engrandecimiento, reducción, contrapunto, anclaje, solidez, desintegración, referencialidad.]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Mieke Bal. "Del lugar al espacio." en Teoría de la narrativa: 101-107.

Seymour Chatman. "Setting." en Story and Discourse: 138-145.

Roland Bournoeuf y Réal Ouellet. "El espacio." en La novela: 115-146.

Ruth Ronen. "Space in Fiction." Poetics Today 7:3 (1986): 421-438.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) En el nivel de la historia (“story”) III y en el nivel de la narración IV: Coordenadas temporales.

LECTURAS COMUNES:

Jahn. 5 [“Tense, Time and Narrative Modes”].

------------------------------------

“Time.” the living handbook of narratology. Michael Scheffel, Antonius Weixler, Lukas Werner. Created: 20. November 2013. Revised: 19. April 2014.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/106.html

ESQUEMA PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

Esquema 11. "El tiempo." [adapt. de G. Genette]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS:

tiempo de la historia (de la aventura), tiempo de la narración, tiempo de la escritura, tiempo de la lectura; orden, secuencia, cronología, sucesividad, causalidad, extensión, desarrollo; frecuencia: singulativa, iterativa, repetitiva; duración: distancia, lapso; repetición, intervalo, ruptura, fragmentación, progresión, anacronías: retrospección, analepsis ("flashback"), anticipación, prolepsis ("flashforward"), silepsis; cambio, simultaneidad, salto, intercalación, inmovilidad, permanencia, aceleración, ritmo, condensación, disminución; tiempo subjetivo, tiempo "objetivo", cronológico, percepción; suspenso, sorpresa; movimiento, montaje, unidad, elipsis; distancia; tiempo y música, tiempo y memoria; flujo, momento, yuxtaposición, trayectoria, viaje, desplazamiento, encadenamiento, horarios; tiempo y espacio; tiempo y focalización; indicadores temporales: objetos, sucesos, personajes, sonidos; tiempos verbales; aspecto.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

S. Rimmon-Kenan. "Text: Time." en Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics: 43-58.

G. Genette. "Order." "Duration." "Frequency." en Narrative Discourse: 33-85; 96-112; 113-160.

M. Bal. "Tiempo." "Aspectos: Observaciones por secuencias, ritmo, frecuencia." en Teoría de la narrativa: 45-50; 57-87.

***PUEDEN UTILIZAR ALGUNOS DE LOS SIGUIENTES RELATOS PARA ILUSTRAR LOS ELEMENTOS***

***Kristen Roupenian: "Cat Person"

Julio Cortázar: "La noche boca arriba"

Guy de Maupassant: "The Necklace"

William Faulkner: "A rose for Emily"

COPIAS DE ESTOS RELATOS SE ENCUENTRAN EN LOS ARCHIVOS AL PIE DE LA PAGINA "PROGRAMA Y SÍLABO DEL CURSO"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18 DE OCTUBRE

***SEGUNDA EVALUACIÓN ESCRITA: Lectura crítica de un artículo.

CONSULTAR LA "(3) GUÍA PARA LA LECTURA DE ARTÍCULOS [PISTAS DE TRABAJO]" Y "(4) Criterios para la evaluación de lecturas critico-analíticas/reseñas breves de libros y artículos" QUE SE ENCUENTRAN EN LA PÁGINA DE "GUIAS/CRITERIOS DE EVALUACIÓN" PARA SABER QUÉ SE ESPERA DE USTEDES Y LOS CRITERIOS QUE VOY A UTILIZAR PARA EVALUAR SUS TRABAJOS.

-----------------------------------------------------

ESCOGER UNO :

*Herman, David. “Scripts, Sequences, and Stories: Elements of a Postclassical Narratology.” PMLA 12.5 (1997): 1046–59. [SE ENCUENTRA EN JSTOR O EN PROJECT MUSE]

*Jahn, Manfred. “Frames, Preferences, and the Reading of Third-Person Narratives: Towards a Cognitive Narratology.” Poetics Today 18:4 (Winter 1997). http://www.uni-koeln.de/~ame02/jahn_1997.pdf

FORMATO: 4-5 Páginas, Font 11, Espacio 1.5.

FECHA LIMITE PARA EL ENVÍO DE LA LECTURA CRÍTICA:

MIÉRCOLES 18 DE OCTUBRE EN O ANTES DE MEDIODÍA.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18-25 DE OCTUBRE

ORGANIZACIÓN DE LAS CLASES / LO QUE NO SE CUBRA EN LA PRIMERA CLASE PASA A LA SEGUNDA:

(I) Comenzaremos con la distinción entre la narratología clásica (o textualista) I / II y la narratología post-clásica (o contextualista) a partir del artículo de Gerald Prince. Introducción comparativa: Narratologías clásica y post-clásica/Narratología formal/estructuralista y narratologías contextualistas. A partir de teorías de la recepción.

LECTURA COMÚN I: [Se encuentra en JSTOR o en PROYECT MUSE]

*Prince, Gerald. “Classical and/or Postclassical Narratology.” L'Esprit Créateur 48:2 (Summer 2008):115-123.

LECTURA DE APOYO SOBRE EL MISMO TEMA:

**Shen, Dan. “Why Contextual and Formal Narratologies Need Each Other.” Journal of Narrative Theory 35:2 (Summer, 2005): 141-171.

---------------------------------------------------------------

(II) De ahí pasaremos a una preve presentación de la teoría de la recepción y otros enfoques centrados en la figura del lector y la actividad de la lectura a partir del inciso [4] del: TEMARIO GENERAL: PREMISAS/DEFINICIONES/DISTINCIONES DE BASE de la primera clase [16 de agosto]: (4) Las diversas teorías/estéticas de la recepción. Los conceptos de competencia comunicativa, horizonte de expectativas y comunidades de interpretación. Ver sobre todo a Hans Robert Jauss, Wolfgang Iser, Stanley Fish. Otras lecturas: Narratologías post-clásicas (cognitiva, afectiva, retórica, feminista, post-colonial, etc.).

LECTURAS COMUNES II: [Se encuentran en JSTOR o en PROYECT MUSE]

*Herman, David. “Scripts, Sequences, and Stories: Elements of a Postclassical Narratology.” PMLA 12.5 (1997): 1046–59.

*Jahn, Manfred. “Frames, Preferences, and the Reading of Third-Person Narratives: Towards a Cognitive Narratology.” Poetics Today 18:4 (Winter 1997). http://www.uni-koeln.de/~ame02/jahn_1997.pdf

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

ELEMENTOS Y CONCEPTOS:

scripts/guiones, frames/marcos, horizonte de expectativas, experiencialidad y narratividad, narratividad y naturalización, preference rules/reglas de preferencia, inference/inferencia, prototipos y estereotipos, natural and unnatural narratology /narratología natural y no-natural, tellability and point/interés narrativo, propósito, objetivo, idea, trust and reliability /confiabilidad, sinceridad, autoridad, ironía, curiosidad y suspenso, affective narratology, simpatía, empatía e identificación, emociones, construcción de sentido a partir de pistas/clues e indicios/cues.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO SOBRE EL MISMO TEMA:

*Alber, Jan and Monika Fludernik. “Introduction.” In Postclassical Narratology. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press, 2010.

*Herman, David. “Cognitive Narratology.” In the living handbook of narratology. Created 7. July 2011. Revised 24. December 2013.

https://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de/node/38.html

------------------. "Directions in Cognitive Narratology - Triangulating Stories, Media, and the Mind." In Postclassical Narratology. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press, 2010.

*Hogan, Patrick Colm. "Introduction." Affective Narratology: The Emotional Structure of Stories. University of Nebraska Press, 2011.

-------------------------------------------------------

(III) Para los estudios narratólogicos enfocados en la interpretación de textos, en la recepción y en la lectura, hay que saber qué se entiende por ideología y la teoría de los "marcos" (frame theory) de E. Goffman y qué herramientas conceptuales ofrecen a la narratología contextualista.

Discusión a partir de los siguientes documentos:

LECTURAS COMUNES III:

(1) Ideology a BRIEF GUIDE - John Lye.pdf (en los ARCHIVOS).

------------------

(2) La teoría de los "marcos" de Erving Goffman: un modelo cognoscitivo/"cognitive" que se utiliza para procesar, comprender e interpretar datos de todo tipo, una herramienta del entendimiento (="a general theory of cognition and knowledge" <Goffman, Minsky, Jahn>) desarrollada en las ciencias sociales. Se nutre de los llamados “defaults”, de las "preferencias" interpretativas.

"Frame Analysis." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_analysis

Goffman, Erving. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.

--------------------------------------------------------------

(IV) La distinción entre proyecto poético o proyecto hermenéutico de acuerdo con las definiciones de Jonathan Culler. Inciso [5] del: TEMARIO GENERAL: PREMISAS/DEFINICIONES/DISTINCIONES DE BASE de la primera clase [16 de agosto]: [5] Dos entradas/direcciones para el estudio de la literatura/del discurso narrativo: la poética y la hermenéutica. Para comprender el uso de los términos en este binomio: proyecto de investigación poético vs proyecto de investigación hermenéutico, según Jonathan Culler. *Las definiciones de Jonathan Culler.

"Here there is a basic distinction, too often neglected in literary studies, between two kinds of projects:

(1) one, modeled on linguistics, takes meanings as what have to be accounted for and tries to work out how they are possible.

(2) The other, by contrast, starts with forms and seeks to interpret them, to tell us what they really mean.

J. Culler. “Language, meaning and interpretation.” Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, 61

*****La discusión de los puntos (I) a (IV) servirán como introducción y trasfondo para comprender la dilucidación de términos ("ELEMENTOS Y CONCEPTOS") que se presentan (o a los que se alude, o que se presuponen) en los artículos introductorios de la corriente principal de la narratología postclásica (o contextualista), a saber, la narratología cognitiva.********

-------------------------------------------------

LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Review: Toward a Second Phase of Postclassical Narratology

Reviewed Work(s): David Herman, James Phelan, Peter J. Rabinowitz, Brian Richardson and Robyn Warhol

Review by: Shang Biwu

Source: Style, Vol. 49, No. 3 (2015), pp. 363-377.

Published by: Penn State University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/style.49.3.0363

--------------------------

Alber, Jan, and Monika Fludernik. “Introduction.” Postclassical Narratology: Approaches and Analysis. Eds. Jan Alber and Monika Fludernik. Columbus: Ohio State UP, 2010. 1–31. Print.

Alber, Jan, Stefan Iversen, Henrik Skov Nielsen, and Brian Richardson. “Unnatural Narratives, Unnatural Narratology: Beyond Mimetic Models.” Narrative 18.2 (2010): 113–36. Print.

Bungård, Peer F., Henrik Skov Nielsen, and Frederik Stjernfelt. Narrative Theories and Poetics: Five Questions. Copenhagen: Automatic Press/VIP, 2012. Print.

Fludernik, Monika. “Histories of Narrative Theory (II): From Structuralism to the Present.” A Companion to Narrative Theory. Eds. James Phelan and Peter J. Rabinowitz. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2005: 36–59.

Fludernik, Monika, and Greta Olson. “Introduction.” Current Trends in Narratology. Ed. Greta Olson. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2011: 1–33.

Friedman, Susan Stanford. “Towards a Transnational Turn in Narrative Theory: Literary Narratives, Traveling Tropes, and the Case of Virginia Woolf and the Tagores.” Narrative 19.1 (Spring 2011):1–32. Print.

Herman, David, and Shang, Biwu. “New Developments in the Study of Narrative: An Interview with David Herman.” Foreign Literature 5 (2009): 97–105. Print.

Herman, David, James Phelan, Peter J. Rabinowitz, Brian Richardson, and Robyn Warhol. Narrative Theory: Core Concepts and Critical Debates. Columbus: Ohio State UP, 2012. Print.

Kindt, Tom, and Hans-Harald Müller. The Implied Author: Concept and Controversy. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2006. Print.

Lanser, Susan S. “The Implied Author: An Agnostic Manifesto.” Style 45.1 (Spring 2011): 153–60. Print.

Nünning, Ansgar. “Narratology or Narratologies? Taking Stock of Recent Developments, Critique and Modest Proposals for Future Usages of the Term.” What Is Narratology? Questions and Answers Regarding the Status of a Discipline. Eds. Tom Kindt and Hans-Harald Müller. Berlin: de Gruter, 2003. 239–75.

(V) Terminaremos con un breve repaso de lo que debe incluir la pre-propuesta y la propuesta.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MÁS LECTURAS DE APOYO:

Herman, David. “Introduction.” Narratologies: New Perspectives on Narrative Analysis. Ed. David Herman. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 1999: 1–30.

------------------. Story Logic: Problems and Possibilities of Narrative. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2002.

-------------------. “Histories of Narrative Theory (I): A Genealogy of Early Developments.” A Companion to Narrative Theory. Ed. James Phelan and Peter J. Rabinowitz. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005: 19–35.

Herman, Luc and Bart Vervaeck. Handbook of Narrative Analysis. Second Edition ed. University of Nebraska Press, 2019.

Vernay, Jean-François. Cognitive Literary Science: Dialogues Between Literature and Cognition. ed. by Michael Burke, Emily T. Troscianko (review). SubStance 49:1 (2020):110-114.

Walsh, Richard. The Rhetoric of Fictionality: Narrative Theory and the Idea of Fiction. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 2007.

Wimmers, Inge Crosman. "Introduction" and "Frames of Reference and the Reader." Poetics of Reading. Course Book ed. Princeton University Press, 2014.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25 DE OCTUBRE

ENVÍO DE LA PRE-PROPUESTA ANTES DE LAS 8:00AM.

PRE-PROPUESTA. *Tres hojas en las que que se identifica:

(1) el objeto (singular o plural) de estudio (=el texto/los textos que se piensa(n) analizar ya sea como material primario o como material de apoyo)

(2) el tema/área de investigación general (=problema teórico-crítico o zona textual, etc. del género “narrativo”) o preferiblemente, la hipótesis de trabajo/propuesta específica

(3) una reflexión breve en torno al tema/hipótesis/propuesta

(4) la(s) metodología(s) analítica(s) prevista(s) (=marco teórico-crítico, ya sea como material de apoyo o material primario)

III. Bibliografía secundaria (por lo menos 5 títulos)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSULTAR LOS SIGUIENTES INCISOS EN LA PÁGINA "GUÍAS PARA LOS TRABAJOS DE REDACCIÓN / CRITERIOS DE EVALUACIÓN":

(0) General: De todo un poco. Recomendaciones para el análisis de textos narrativos literarios. Palabras claves/Keywords. Pregunta(s) claves/Research Question(s).

(1) Bibliografías anotadas/Annotated Bibliographies/ Base para el repaso de la literatura en las monografías/ensayos argumentativos/tesis

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

25 DE OCTUBRE

CONTINUACIÓN DE LA CLASE ANTERIOR MÁS PRESENTACIÓN Y DISCUSIÓN DE LAS PRE-PROPUESTAS. REPASO DE CONCEPTOS TEÓRICOS A LA LUZ DE LAS PRE-PROPUESTAS.

PARA LA DISCUSIÓN EN CLASE

A. Repaso de los artículos de Herman y Jahn a la luz de las lecturas críticas.

B. La distinción entre proyecto poético o proyecto hermenéutico de acuerdo con las definiciones de Jonathan Culler. Inciso [5] del: TEMARIO GENERAL: PREMISAS/DEFINICIONES/DISTINCIONES DE BASE de la primera clase [16 de agosto]: [5] Dos entradas/direcciones para el estudio de la literatura/del discurso narrativo: la poética y la hermenéutica. Para comprender el uso de los términos en este binomio: proyecto de investigación poético vs proyecto de investigación hermenéutico, según Jonathan Culler. *Las definiciones de Jonathan Culler.

"Here there is a basic distinction, too often neglected in literary studies, between two kinds of projects:

(1) one, modeled on linguistics, takes meanings as what have to be accounted for and tries to work out how they are possible. [EL PROYECTO POÉTICO: UTILIZA SIGNIFICADOS/INTERPRETACIONES COMO PUNTO DE PARTIDA; LE INTERESA EXAMINAR LO QUE POSIBILITA INTERPRETACIONES/SIGNIFICADOS]

(2) The other, by contrast, starts with forms and seeks to interpret them, to tell us what they really mean.

[EL PROYECTO HERMENÉUTICO: LE INTERESA INTERPRETAR, ASIGNAR SIGNIFICADOS]

J. Culler. “Language, meaning and interpretation.” Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, 61

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*1 DE NOVIEMBRE - TRABAJO INDIVIDUAL EN LA PROPUESTA

*7 DE NOVIEMBRE - ENVÍO DE LA PROPUESTA ANTES DE LAS 8:00AM.

8 DE NOVIEMBRE - CITAS INDIVIDUALES PARA DISCUTIR LA PROPUESTA

5:00 Joseph 5:30 Valeria 6:00 Mariana 6:30 Daniel 7:00 Andrea

7:30 María

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LA PROPUESTA

Formato y otras especificaciones de la propuesta:

Extensión: 4 páginas [sin incluir la bibliografía], división en partes [a-f]

Formato para la bibliografía: MLA

I. Presentación del proyecto

(a) título tentativo

(b) formulación de la hipótesis de trabajo/propuesta específica en una o dos oraciones completas (=lo que se va a demostrar, probar, argumentar)

(d) reflexión en torno a la hipótesis (=sus implicaciones, interrogantes que plantea y que habrá que tratar de contestar al respecto, áreas que se podrán o deberán explorar, vías de investigación, metodología, etc.)

(e) marcos conceptuales/teóricos [=metodología/herramientas critico-analíticas] que se piensan utilizar y su justificación

(f) justificación del tema como propio de la literatura comparada / comparatismo

II. Bibliografía primaria

III. Bibliografía secundaria [comentada/anotada brevemente: deberá resumirse a grandes rasgos la contribución de los artículos al ensayo.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*15 DE NOVIEMBRE

ENVÍO DE LA PRIMERA VERSIÓN DE LAS INTRODUCCIONES ANTES DE LAS 8:00AM.

*15 DE NOVIEMBRE

TEMARIO DE LA SESIÓN Y DISCUSIÓN:

(1) TEMA CENTRAL DE LA SESIÓN:***(2) La introducción. La hipótesis de trabajo/The working thesis /The thesis statement. DISCUSIÓN A PARTIR DE LAS INTRODUCCIONES ENVIADAS Y DE LOS DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO.

TEMA SECUNDARIO: El ensayo argumentativo en su conjunto.

***RECORDATORIO IMPORTANTE I:

El artículo/ensayo argumentativo/la monografía final

EL ARTICULO [ensayo argumentativo/monografía] FINAL

Formato y otras especificaciones:

Extensión: 8-10 páginas, doble espacio, “fuente” 11.

Formato: MLA

I. Introducción (hipótesis de trabajo, contextualización de la hipótesis, reflexión, metodología)

II. Desarrollo (argumentos, evidencia textual, en tantas partes como lo requiera el desarrollo de la hipótesis)

III. Conclusión o conclusiones

IV. Bibliografía primaria [=texto(s) analizado(s)] y secundaria [dividida entre bibliografía citada y bibliografía general]

OBJETIVOS DEL PROYECTO DE INVESTIGACIÓN Y ARTÍCULO (=ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO / MONOGRAFÍA) CORRESPONDIENTE:

*formular y desarrollar una hipótesis de trabajo propia del campo disciplinario de la literatura comparada/comparatismo y del área de trabajo desarrollado en la clase (=análisis de discurso narrativo)

*analizar, comentar e interpretar textos narrativos

*utilizar marcos conceptuales/teóricos necesarios para elaborar y desarrollar la hipótesis de trabajo y analizar los textos narrativos utilizados en el trabajo

*fundamentar y anclar los análisis, las reflexiones, los temas en evidencia textual

*saber citar (discurso directo y discurso indirecto)

*argumentar de forma convincente las opiniones, los comentarios, los análisis, las observaciones

*leer, comprender, resumir, y utilizar fuentes secundarias para fines de apoyo argumentativo (=sobre la base del llamado “repaso de la literatura”)

*entablar diálogo y/o debate con las fuentes secundarias en torno a la hipótesis de trabajo y/o de los temas desarrollados

*establecer un equilibrio entre los análisis personales, la evidencia textual y las referencias a las fuentes secundarias

------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO PARA LA DISCUSIÓN:

(1) LITE 6007 Introducciones de artículos argumentativos. EJEMPLOS. En Archivos al pie de esta página.

(2) La hipótesis de trabajo/The working thesis /The thesis statement.

https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/thesis-statements/

Thesis Statements: This handout describes what a thesis statement is, how thesis statements work in your writing, and how you can craft or refine one for your draft.

Introduction

Writing often takes the form of persuasion—convincing others that you have an interesting, logical point of view on the subject you are studying. Course assignments often ask you to make a persuasive case in writing. You are asked to convince your reader of your point of view. This form of persuasion, often called academic argument, follows a predictable pattern in writing. After a brief introduction of your topic, you state your point of view on the topic directly and often in one sentence. This sentence is the thesis statement, and it serves as a summary of the argument you’ll make in the rest of your paper.

What is a thesis statement? A thesis statement: [LA HIPÓTESIS DE TRABAJO]

• tells the reader how you will interpret the significance of the subject matter under discussion.

• is a road map for the paper; in other words, it tells the reader what to expect from the rest of the paper.

• directly answers the question asked of you. A thesis statement is an interpretation of a question or subject, not the subject itself. The subject, or topic, of an essay might be World War II or Moby Dick; a thesis must then offer a way to understand the war or the novel.

• makes a claim that others might dispute.

• is usually a single sentence near the beginning of your paper (most often, at the end of the first paragraph) that presents your argument to the reader. The rest of the paper, the body of the essay, gathers and organizes evidence that will persuade the reader of the logic of your interpretation.

If your assignment asks you to take a position or develop a claim about a subject, you may need to convey that position or claim in a thesis statement near the beginning of your draft.

How do I create a thesis statement or “working thesis”?

A thesis is the result of a lengthy thinking process. Formulating a thesis is not the first thing you do after reading an essay assignment. Before you develop an argument on any topic, you have to collect and organize evidence, look for possible relationships between known facts (such as surprising contrasts or similarities), and think about the significance of these relationships. Once you do this thinking, you will probably have a “working thesis” that presents a basic or main idea and an argument that you think you can support with evidence. Both the argument and your thesis are likely to need adjustment along the way.

Writers use all kinds of techniques to stimulate their thinking and to help them clarify relationships or comprehend the broader significance of a topic and arrive at a thesis statement. For more ideas on how to get started, see our handout on brainstorming.

How do I know if my thesis is strong?

When reviewing your first draft and its working thesis, ask yourself the following:

• Do I answer the question?

• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose?

• Is my thesis statement specific enough? Why is something “good”; what specifically makes something “successful”?

• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test?

• Does my essay support my thesis specifically and without wandering?

• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test?

Examples

[1] Example 1. [CONTRA-EJEMPLO/INSUFICIENTE/DÉBIL] Suppose you are taking a course on contemporary communication, and the instructor hands out the following essay assignment: “Discuss the impact of social media on public awareness.” Looking back at your notes, you might start with this working thesis:

Social media impacts public awareness in both positive and negative ways.

You can use the questions above to help you revise this general statement into a stronger thesis.

• Do I answer the question? You can analyze this if you rephrase “discuss the impact” as “what is the impact?” This way, you can see that you’ve answered the question only very generally with the vague “positive and negative ways.”

• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose? Not likely. Only people who maintain that social media has a solely positive or solely negative impact could disagree.

• Is my thesis statement specific enough? No. What are the positive effects? What are the negative effects?

• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test? No. Why are they positive? How are they positive? What are their causes? Why are they negative? How are they negative? What are their causes?

• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test? No. Why should anyone care about the positive and/or negative impact of social media?

After thinking about your answers to these questions, you decide to focus on the one impact you feel strongly about and have strong evidence for:

Because not every voice on social media is reliable, people have become much more critical consumers of information, and thus, more informed voters.[MEJOR]

This version is a much stronger thesis! It answers the question, takes a specific position that others can challenge, and it gives a sense of why it matters.

[2] Example 2. [CONTRA-EJEMPLO/INSUFICIENTE/DÉBIL] Suppose your literature professor hands out the following assignment in a class on the American novel: Write an analysis of some aspect of Mark Twain’s novel Huckleberry Finn. “This will be easy,” you think. “I loved Huckleberry Finn!” You grab a pad of paper and write:

Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn is a great American novel.

You begin to analyze your thesis:

• Do I answer the question? No. The prompt asks you to analyze some aspect of the novel. Your working thesis is a statement of general appreciation for the entire novel.

Think about aspects of the novel that are important to its structure or meaning—for example, the role of storytelling, the contrasting scenes between the shore and the river, or the relationships between adults and children.

Now you write:

In Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain develops a contrast between life on the river and life on the shore.

• Do I answer the question? Yes!

• Have I taken a position that others might challenge or oppose? Not really. This contrast is well-known and accepted.

• Is my thesis statement specific enough? It’s getting there–you have highlighted an important aspect of the novel for investigation. However, it’s still not clear what your analysis will reveal.

• Does my thesis pass the “how and why?” test? Not yet. Compare scenes from the book and see what you discover. Free write, make lists, jot down Huck’s actions and reactions and anything else that seems interesting.

• Does my thesis pass the “So what?” test? What’s the point of this contrast? What does it signify?”

After examining the evidence and considering your own insights, you write:

Through its contrasting river and shore scenes, Twain’s Huckleberry Finn suggests that to find the true expression of American democratic ideals, one must leave “civilized” society and go back to nature.

This final thesis statement presents an interpretation of a literary work based on an analysis of its content. Of course, for the essay itself to be successful, you must now present evidence from the novel that will convince the reader of your interpretation.

----------------------------------------------

(3) PARA EL ENSAYO EN SU CONJUNTO.

https://www.bucks.edu/media/bcccmedialibrary/pdf/HOWTOWRITEALITERARYANALYSISESSAY_10.15.07_001.pdf

How to Write a Literary Analysis.

The Introduction

The introduction to your literary analysis essay should try to capture your reader's

interest. To bring immediate focus to your subject, you may want to use a quotation, a

provocative question, a brief anecdote, a startling statement, or a combination of these.

You may also want to include background information relevant to your thesis and

necessary for the reader to understand the position you are taking. In addition, you

need to include the title of the work of literature and name of the author. The

following are satisfactory introductory paragraphs which include appropriate thesis

statements:

[EJEMPLOS]

A. What would one expect to be the personality of a man who has his wife

sent away to a convent (or perhaps has had her murdered) because she took too

much pleasure in the sunset and in a compliment paid to her by another man? It

is just such a man—a Renaissance duke—who Robert Browning portrays in his

poem “My Last Duchess.” A character analysis of the Duke reveals that through

his internal dialogue, his interpretation of earlier incidents, and his actions, his

traits—arrogance, jealousy, and greediness—emerge.

B. The first paragraph of Alberto Alvaro Rios's short story “The Secret Lion”

presents a twelve-year-old boy's view of growing up—everything changes. As

the narrator informs the reader, when the magician pulls a tablecloth out from

under a pile of dishes, children are amazed at the “stay-the-same part,” while

adults focus only on the tablecloth itself (42). Adults have the benefit of

experience and know the trick will work as long as the technique is correct.

When people “grow up,” they gain this experience and knowledge but lose their

innocence and sense of wonder. In other words, the price paid for growing up is

a permanent sense of loss. This tradeoff is central to “The Secret Lion.” The key

symbols in the story reinforce its main theme: change is inevitable and always

accompanied by a sense of loss.

C. The setting of John Updike's story “A & P” is crucial to the reader's

understanding of Sammy's decision to quit his job. Even though Sammy knows

that his quitting will make life more difficult for him, he instinctively insists upon

rejecting what the A & P represents in the story. When he rings up a “No Sale”

and “saunter[s]” out of the store, Sammy leaves behind not only a job but the

rigid state of mind associated with the A & P. Although Sammy is the central

character in the story, Updike seems to invest as much effort in describing the

setting as he does Sammy. The title, after all, is not “Youthful Rebellion” or

“Sammy Quits” but “A & P.” The setting is the antagonist of the story and plays a

role that is as important as Sammy's.

The Body of the Essay and the Importance of Topic Sentences

The term regularly used for the development of the central idea of a literary analysis

essay is the body. In this section you present the paragraphs (at least 3 paragraphs

for a 500-750 word essay) that support your thesis statement. Good literary analysis

essays contain an explanation of your ideas and evidence from the text (short story,

poem, play) that supports those ideas. Textual evidence consists of summary,

paraphrase, specific details, and direct quotations.

Each paragraph should contain a topic sentence (usually the first sentence of the

paragraph) which states one of the topics associated with your thesis, combined with

some assertion about how the topic will support the central idea. The purpose of the

topic sentence is twofold:

1. To relate the details of the paragraph to your thesis statement.

2. To tie the details of the paragraph together.

The substance of each of your developmental paragraphs (the body of your essay)

will be the explanations, summaries, paraphrases, specific details, and direct quotations

you need to support and develop the more general statement you have made in your

topic sentence. The following is the first developmental paragraph after one of the

introductory paragraphs (C) above:

[EJEMPLO]

TOPIC SENTENCE -> EXPLANATIONS AND TEXTUAL EVIDENCE

Sammy's descriptions of the A & P present a

setting that is ugly, monotonous, and rigidly

regulated. The chain store is a common fixture

in modern society, so the reader can identify

with the uniformity Sammy describes. The

fluorescent light is as blandly cool as the

"checkerboard green-and-cream rubber tile

floor" (486). The "usual traffic in the store

moves in one direction (except for the swim

suited girls, who move against it), and

everything is neatly organized and categorized

in tidy aisles. The dehumanizing routine of this

environment is suggested by Sammy's offhand

references to the typical shoppers as "sheep,"

"house slaves," and "pigs” (486). These regular

customers seem to walk through the store in a

stupor; as Sammy indicates, not even dynamite

could move them out of their routine (485).

This paragraph is a strong one because it is developed through the use of quotations,

summary, details, and explanation to support the topic sentence. Notice how it relates

back to the thesis statement.

------------------------------------

The Title of Your Essay

It is essential that you give your essay a title that is descriptive of the approach you are

taking in your paper. Just as you did in your introductory paragraph, try to get the

reader's attention. Using only the title of the literary work you are examining is

unsatisfactory. The titles that follow are appropriate for the papers (A, B, C) discussed

above:

Robert Browning's Duke: A Portrayal of a Sinister Man

The A & P as a State of Mind

Theme in "The Secret Lion": The Struggle of Adolescence

Audience

Consider the reader for whom you are writing your essay. Imagine you are writing for

not only your professor but also the other students in your class who have about as

much education as you do. They have read the assigned work just as you have, but

perhaps they have not thought about it in exactly the same way. In other words, it is

not necessary to "retell" the work of literature in any way. Rather, it is your role to

be the explainer or interpreter of the work—to tell what certain elements of the work

mean in relation to your central idea (thesis). When you make references to the text of

the short story, poem, or play, you are doing so to remind your audience of something

they already know. The principle emphasis of your essay is to draw conclusions

and develop arguments. Be sure to avoid plot summary.

---------------------------------

(4) El ensayo argumentativo.

https://www.ejemplos.co/ensayos-argumentativos-2/

El ensayo argumentativo es un texto escrito que tiene como finalidad persuadir o convencer a sus lectores sobre una serie de ideas expuestas.

Los ensayos pueden abordar temáticas de cualquier disciplina sobre la que el autor busca inclinar la postura del lector en consonancia con la propia. Por ejemplo, La Revolución Rusa de 1917: Un análisis constructivista de la Revolución de Octubre.

Los ensayos contienen elementos propios del género expositivo porque deben explicar la postura del autor ante determinado tema o problemática. Argumentar es defender una serie de ideas que el autor debe exponer de manera ordenada y lógica. Los ensayos argumentativos pueden incluir premisas opuestas a las del autor para refutarlas con sus razonamientos y reforzar aún más sus argumentos.

Para redactar estos textos académicos, el autor debe estar empapado en la materia y, antes de su redacción, debe llevar adelante una investigación. Así, contará con las herramientas y elementos necesarios para elaborar sus argumentos con solidez.

Los ensayos argumentativos combinan la subjetividad con la rigurosidad conceptual. Se caracterizan por ser textos reflexivos ya que no ofrecen resultados concluyentes sobre el tema tratado sino que brindan herramientas para que el lector reflexione al respecto.

Partes de un ensayo argumentativo

Introducción. Es la primera parte del texto. Se presenta el tema que abordará y su postura al respecto.

Desarrollo. Es el cuerpo del ensayo. Se exponen los argumentos del tema, junto con las valoraciones personales y opiniones. Se incluyen citas y alusiones a otras fuentes (tesis, ensayos, manuales, reportajes, artículos periodísticos) que hayan estudiado el tema, que avalan y refuerzan la postura del autor.

Conclusión. Es la etapa final del ensayo. Se refuerzan las ideas planteadas durante todo el texto. Para eso, el autor retoma los argumentos principales y explicita su postura final.

Fuentes bibliográficas. Suelen ubicarse después de la conclusión, donde se listan los documentos consultados como fuentes bibliográficas.

Recursos argumentativos

Como todo texto argumentativo, los ensayos argumentativos utilizan ciertos recursos que tienen como finalidad hacer reflexionar al lector y plantear su punto de vista. Algunos de estos recursos son:

Recursos

Pregunta retórica. Plantea un interrogante que incita a la reflexión inicial del lector, y luego busca desarrollar posibles respuestas o pensamientos que surgen de esa pregunta. Por ejemplo: Entonces, ¿qué desafíos nos plantea la educación a distancia?

Analogía. Establece semejanzas entre dos conceptos o situaciones, para lograr la identificación del lector. Por ejemplo: Así como los niños aprenden de sus padres a través del ejemplo, la escuela debe brindar ese espacio de identificación.

Cita de autoridad. Cita a un experto sobre el tema. Por ejemplo: Explica el Ministro de Educación: “La brecha digital dejó afuera a un segmento grande de alumnos de todo el país”.

Datos estadísticos. Apoyan los argumentos con información cuantitativa confiable. Por ejemplo: El desempeño escolar bajó un 36 % desde el inicio de la pandemia, según el último informe del ministerio de educación.

Ejemplificación. Se brindan ejemplos para explicar en la práctica el concepto que se busca transmitir. Por ejemplo: La Escuela Normal 5, por ejemplo, redujo su alumnado en un 45 %, lo que significa que casi la mitad de los niños abandonaron el año escolar.

Contraejemplo. Marca una excepción a una regla general para demostrar que una afirmación es falsa. Por ejemplo: En países donde la mayoría de la población tiene acceso a internet, las consecuencias negativas de la pandemia sobre la educación fueron mínimas.

Generalización. Se presentan numerosos hechos particulares para compararlos y relacionarlos entre sí. Este recurso muestra que todo funciona de la misma manera. Por ejemplo: Para la mayoría de los docentes, la educación a distancia supuso enormes desafíos, tanto en relación al manejo de la tecnología, como del trato vincular a través de la pantalla.

Fuente: https://www.ejemplos.co/ensayos-argumentativos-2/#ixzz7CrPuurcm

-------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*21 DE NOVIEMBRE

ENVÍO DE LA SEGUNDA VERSIÓN DE LAS INTRODUCCIONES Y BOSQUEJOS DEL CUERPO/DESARROLLO DEL TRABAJO O PRIMEROS PÁRRAFOS DEL DESARROLLO ANTES DEL MEDIODÍA.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

22 DE NOVIEMBRE [SERÁ EN LÍNEA]

TEMARIO: (1) MÁS TRABAJO GRUPAL EN CLASE SOBRE LAS INTRODUCCIONES Y EL DESARROLLO A PARTIR DE LOS TRABAJOS ENVIADOS

(2) REPASO DE CONCEPTOS TEÓRICOS REQUERIDOS PARA EL DESARROLLO DE LOS PROYECTOS. SE IDENTIFICARÁN EN SU MOMENTO.

VER LOS DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO EN TORNO AL ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO EN SU CONJUNTO, INCLUYENDO EL "ABSTRACT" (=*** EN ESTA PÁGINA BAJO "DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO" Y EN LA PÁGINA "GUÍAS/CRITERIOS DE EVALUACIÓN").

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***RECORDATORIO IMPORTANTE II:

Para el "cuerpo"/desarrollo del trabajo.

https://valenciacollege.edu/students/learning-support/winter-park/communications/documents/LiteraryResearchPaperStructure.pdf

Literary Research Paper Structure.

III. Analysis/Argument- Core of the essay [=***El cuerpo del trabajo: presentación/discusión de la evidencia argumentativa]

A. Breaks down the thesis into sub-points (separate paragraph for each)

1. Establishes broad points

2. Identifies each point and defines it

3. Narrows each point with specific details

4. Shows comparisons or contrasts to be analyzed

B. Gives reasons for points or arguments that you make

1. Supports points with explanation

a) Fully develops the idea

b) Uses facts to support point

2. Use logical reasoning

a) Connects ideas in a manner that does not confuse the reader

b) Makes assumptions or opinions that can be backed with evidence

C. Shows evidence of your points

1. Uses samples from works of selected authors (primary sources)

2. Applies criticism and outside sources (secondary sources)

a) Quotes sources accurately

(1) Introduces quotes with the author and source of the information

(2) Provides only that much of the quote that is necessary to get across

meaning

(3) Explains the significance of the quote in relation to the point you

were making

(4) Uses correct parenthetical reference

3. Summarizes and paraphrases succinctly

4. Avoids any plagiarism and documents all sources

-------------------------------------------------------------

***OTROS TEMAS RELACIONADOS CON LA REDACCIÓN DEL ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO:

(1) LAS NOTAS EXPLICATIVAS

https://www.servicescape.com/blog/everything-you-need-to-know-about-footnotes#:~:text=Footnotes%20allow%20an%20author%20to,explanation%20to%20a%20general%20audience.

(2) EL PÁRRAFO

Paragraphs and Topic Sentences. https://wts.indiana.edu/writing-guides/paragraphs-and-topic-sentences.html

(3) TÍTULOS Y SUB-TÍTULOS

https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Titles%20(revised).pdf

(4) TÍTULOS DE SECCIONES (=de desear utilizarlos)

https://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/lesson-plans/exploring-section-headings-support#:~:text=Writers%20use%20section%20headings%20for,become%20strategic%20content%2Darea%20readers.

Writers use section headings for a variety of reasons: to help readers figure out what to expect in an upcoming section, to hint at a main idea, or to organize the article's ideas. Understanding section headings can help students become strategic content-area readers.

*(5) EL "ABSTRACT".

El "abstract":

https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/guides/writing-an-abstract

What is an abstract?

An abstract is a 150- to 300-word paragraph that provides readers with a quick overview of your essay or report and its organization. It should express your thesis (or central idea) and your key points; it should also suggest any implications or applications of the research you discuss in the paper.

According to Carole Slade, an abstract is “a concise summary of the entire paper.”

The function of an abstract is to describe, not to evaluate or defend, the paper.
The abstract should begin with a brief but precise statement of the problem or issue, followed by a description of the research method and design, the major findings, and the conclusions reached.
The abstract should contain the most important key words referring to method and content: these facilitate access to the abstract by computer search and enable a reader to decide whether to read the entire dissertation.

Note: Your abstract should read like an overview of your paper, not a proposal for what you intended to study or accomplish. Avoid beginning your sentences with phrases like, “This essay will examine...” or “In this research paper I will attempt to prove...”

-----------------------------------------------------------

In terms of content, a good dissertation abstract usually covers the following points:

The purpose of the research (what’s it about and why’s that important)
The methodology (how you carried out the research)
The key research findings (what answers you found)
The implications of these findings (what these answers mean)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXAMPLES

https://english.as.uky.edu/dissertation-abstracts

Amy K. Anderson, 2014.

“Image/Text and Text/Image: Reimagining Multimodal Relationships through Dissociation”

Abstract:

W.J.T. Mitchell has famously noted that we are in the midst of a “pictorial turn,” and images are playing an increasingly important role in digital and multimodal communication. My dissertation addresses the question of how meaning is made when texts and images are united in multimodal arguments. Visual rhetoricians have often attempted to understand text-image arguments by privileging one medium over the other, either using text-based rhetorical principles or developing new image-based theories. I argue that the relationship between the two media is more dynamic, and can be better understood by applying The New Rhetoric’s concept of dissociation, which Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca developed to demonstrate how the interaction of differently valued concepts can construct new meaning. My dissertation expands the range of dissociation by applying it specifically to visual contexts and using it to critique visual arguments in a series of historical moments when political, religious, and economic factors cause one form of media to be valued over the other: Byzantine Iconoclasm, the late medieval period, the 1950’s advertising boom, and the modern digital age. In each of these periods, I argue that dissociation reveals how the privileged medium can shape an entire multimodal argument. I conclude with a discussion of dissociative multimodal pedagogy, applying dissociation to the multimodal composition classroom.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Todd Hendricks, 2014.

“Knowing and Being Known: Sexual Delinquency, Stardom, and Adolescent Girlhood in Midcentury American Film”

Abstract:

Sexual delinquency marked midcentury cinematic representations of adolescent girls in 1940s, 50, and early 60s. Drawing from the history of adolescence and the context of midcentury female juvenile delinquency, I argue that studios and teen girl stars struggled for decades with publicity, censorship, and social expectations regarding the sexual license of teenage girls. Until the late 1950s, exploitation films and B movies exploited teen sex and pregnancy while mainstream Hollywood ignored those issues, struggling to promote teen girl stars by tightly controlling their private lives but depriving fan magazines of the gossip and scandals that normally fueled the machinery of stardom. The emergence and image of the postwar, sexually autonomous teen girl finally began to see expression in mainstream melodramas of the late 50s, and teen girl stars such as Sandra Dee and Natalie Wood created new, “post-delinquent” star images wherein “good girls” could still be sexually experienced. This new image was a significant departure from the widespread belief that the sexually active teen girl was a fundamentally delinquent threat to the nuclear family, and offered a liberal counterpoint to more conservative teen girl prototypes like Hayley Mills, which continued to have cultural currency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

George Micajah Phillips, 2011.

“Seeing Subjects: Recognition, Identity, and Visual Cultures in Literary Modernism”

Abstract:

Seeing Subjects plots a literary history of modern Britain that begins with Dorian Gray obsessively inspecting his portrait’s changes and ends in Virginia Woolf’s visit to the cinema where she found audiences to be “savages watching the pictures.” Focusing on how literature in the late-19th and 20th centuries regarded images as possessing a shaping force over how identities are understood and performed, I argue that modernists in Britain felt mediated images were altering, rather than merely representing, British identity. As Britain’s economy expanded to unprecedented imperial reach and global influence, new visual technologies also made it possible to render images culled from across the British world—from its furthest colonies to darkest London—to the small island nation, deeply and irrevocably complicating British identity. In response, Oscar Wilde, Joseph Conrad, T. S. Eliot, and others sought to better understand how identity was recognized, particularly visually. By exploring how painting, photography, colonial exhibitions, and cinema sought to manage visual representations of identity, these modernists found that recognition began by acknowledging the familiar but also went further to acknowledge what was strange and new as well. Reading recognition and misrecognition as crucial features of modernist texts, Seeing Subjects argues for a new understanding of how modernism’s formal experimentation came to be and for how it calls for responses from readers today.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***29 DE NOVIEMBRE

ÚLTIMA REUNIÓN GRUPAL PRESENCIAL, DISCUSION GENERAL Y EVALUACIÓN DEL CURSO

Se trata de una clase de importancia triple: (1) para el Departamento, porque estaremos discutiendo y evaluando lo que se ha hecho en el curso. Esto es de gran valor para determinar el papel que juega este curso en el Programa Graduado; (2) para ustedes, porque es la última oportunidad grupal que tendrán para expresar sus dudas y recibir recomendaciones en lo que respecta sus proyectos individuales; (3) para mí, porque así veré qué ha funcionado y qué no ha funcionado desde el punto de vista pedagógico en el curso y, de enseñarlo nuevamente, qué se deberá mantener o modificar. Como les dije a cada uno en las entrevistas más recientes, ya deberían estar en la etapa de la redacción del desarrollo de la monografía. Los que deseen saber si van por buen camino en sus redacciones o quisieran que yo les ofrezca alguna orientación adicional sobre los proyectos, independientemente de la etapa en la que se encuentren, pueden enviarme, entre hoy y mañana, algún párrafo (o más). En la clase, se repasarán nuevamente los objetivos y requerimientos de este trabajo.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***OBJETIVOS DEL PROYECTO DE INVESTIGACIÓN Y ENSAYO ARGUMENTATIVO / MONOGRAFÍA CORRESPONDIENTE [ver la página de "GUÍAS/CRITERIOS DE EVALUACIÓN" para más detalles]

****************************************

EN SU CONJUNTO, EL PROYECTO INDIVIDUAL (INVESTIGACIÓN + MONOGRAFÍA) DEBERÁ DEMOSTRAR QUE EL ESTUDIANTE PUEDE INTEGRAR TEORÍA, INVESTIGACIÓN e INTERPRETACIÓN Y TRABAJAR A PARTIR DE UNA PERSPECTIVA Y EN UN CONTEXTO RECONOCIDOS COMO PROPIOS DE LOS ESTUDIOS LITERARIOS EN GENERAL, DEL ÁREA DISCIPLINARIA DE LA LITERATURA COMPARADA Y DEL ÁREA DE TRABAJO ESPECÍFICO DESARROLLADO EN LA CLASE (=la narratología)

*formular y desarrollar una hipótesis de trabajo propia del campo disciplinario de la literatura comparada/comparatismo y del área de trabajo desarrollado en la clase (=la narratología)

*analizar, comentar e interpretar textos narrativos

*utilizar marcos conceptuales/teóricos apropiados y necesarios para elaborar y desarrollar la hipótesis de trabajo y analizar los textos narrativos utilizados en el trabajo

*fundamentar y anclar los análisis, las reflexiones, los temas, etc. en evidencia textual

*saber citar (discurso directo y discurso indirecto)

*argumentar de forma convincente las opiniones, los comentarios, los análisis, las observaciones

*leer, comprender, resumir, y utilizar fuentes secundarias para fines de apoyo argumentativo (=sobre la base del llamado “repaso de la literatura”)

*entablar diálogo y/o debate con las fuentes secundarias en torno a la hipótesis de trabajo y/o de los temas desarrollados

*establecer un equilibrio entre los análisis/las interpretaciones personales, la evidencia textual y las referencias a las fuentes secundarias

------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7-10 DE DICIEMBRE - EN LÍNEA

REUNIONES INDIVIDUALES, DE SER NECESARIAS

------------------------------------------------

*13-15 DE DICIEMBRE

***ENVÍO DE LOS ENSAYOS ARGUMENTATIVOS/MONOGRAFÍAS FINALES***

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO

https://howtowrite.customwritings.com/post/literature-argumentative-essay-guide/

Guide to Writing Argumentative Essays in Literature.

What is an Argumentative Essay

Any argumentative essay aims at presenting and persuading the readers regarding some point of view. However, in order to meet this goal, the writer, first of all, has to make a claim that would be the main argument of his or her future essay. [LA HIPOTESIS DE TRABAJO]

Another important thing worth mentioning here is evidence and proofs that are used to support the claim and illustrate it. When it comes to literature, one should remember that there can be many different opinions on the same literary work, character, and even the author’s writing style. One of the most significant things about writing argumentative essays in literature is being familiar with the original text. That is, arguing for or against something is rather challenging without knowing the plot, storyline, and little details is undeniable.

Topics for Argumentative Essays in Literature

While talking about choosing the topics for your future argumentative essay in literature, it is necessary to mention that they can deal with literally anything beginning from the use of literary devices and ending up with the writer’s realistic representation of social issues of the period. When thinking about the arguments, you should also analyze the relevancy and originality of your theme. For instance, during the past few years, more and more students tend to choose topics related to feminism or discrimination as these issues are widely discussed in modern society. Undoubtedly, these themes are essential, but if some of your classmates choose similar problems for writing an argumentative essay, your writing risks to be undervalued. Another example of not-that-successful ideas for your work includes using widely known literary works and issues. That is, it is a bad idea to talk about religion and Harry Potter books because much has been already said on this issue.

On the contrary, you should think about some aspects of the writer’s style or the literary work that would be interesting to you. It can be both the daily life of the described people or community and analysis of Biblical allusions in a particular work. Another hint would be using modern literary works for writing an argumentative essay because you can come up with fresh ideas. Using Shakespearean play “Othello,” for instance, may be a mistake because there are almost no chances that you will discuss something new about this text.

Pre-writing Tips

As it was already mentioned, before writing an argumentative essay in literature, you have to be familiar with the literary work you are going to analyze. Plot twists, dialogues, and even long character descriptions are all worth considering when one has to come up with an interesting argument. It is impossible to support your argument without detailed knowledge of the text. What is more, one should remember about cultural, political, social, economic, and even historical backgrounds of both the author and his or her work.

Another tip before writing an argumentative essay in literature is getting familiar with criticism about an author and a literary work. On the one hand, it is possible that critics’ opinions may influence and even distort your personal point of view. On the other hand, it is better also to analyze different sides of the argument to provide the necessary evidence and proofs. Thus, another recommendation to write an effective argumentative essay in literature would be to write down all the arguments and counterarguments. In such a way, you will be ready to refute any counterargument. Moreover, it is a great idea to include a couple of counterarguments and their rebuttals in your essay, so the readers can be sure that you have taken different opinions into account. Finally, you should look up all the necessary quotes to be used in your argumentative essay and connect them with your argument. As a result, you will already have a brief roadmap of your future essay with the most important points. Do not forget that it is beneficial to support every part of your argument with a direct quotation from the original text, so the readers see how you connect the ideas. Furthermore, such a structure will make your essay logical and coherent.

Structure of Your Argumentative Essay

Many students face difficulties when structuring their argumentative essays. Nevertheless, the key to success here is to follow the basic essay structure that includes such components as the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. However, one should not forget about such elements of any argumentative essay as an effective title and thesis statement. Even though the majority of students prefer short and understandable titles consisting of approximately five words, this is not the case with argumentative essays. Indeed, you should clearly state the argument in the title of your essay to show the readers what this work will be about. Sometimes, the title of an argumentative essay may even take two lines, especially if you are writing about literary work because you have to include both the name of the writer and the work itself. Here is a fine example of an effective title: ‘Mary Wollstonecraft’s ‘A Vindication of The Right of a Woman’ as first feminist manifesto.’

Outline

The first paragraph of any essay is the introductory one. Nevertheless, many students are confused about what to include in this paragraph because it has to prepare the readers for the body paragraphs of the essay. When you are writing an argumentative essay in literature, it is clear that in the introductory paragraph, you have to mention the background of the literary work you will be discussing. It includes not only the name of the author and the very work but also short coverage of the main points of the text. The last sentence of the introductory paragraph is your thesis. It states the main idea of the whole essay and should be precise and clear. Depending on the essay, you can use the next sentence templates to create your thesis:

– ‘In his literary work “Oliver Twist”, Charles Dickens argues that … ’

– ‘Therefore, on the examples of sonnet 67 and sonnet 78, it is evident that William Shakespeare uses flowers as symbols of love and innocence’.

The next paragraphs are called the body paragraphs and contain the most important part of the whole essay. In this part, you will be presenting and supporting your argument. Each body paragraph talks about one idea relevant to your argument. Without a doubt, the number of such body paragraphs varies depending on the length of the essay. However, you should remember that you can only talk about one idea in one paragraph. Consequently, for the readers, it will be much easier to follow your ideas. As it was already mentioned in the previous paragraphs, it is also recommended to introduce at least one counterargument and its rebuttal. As a rule, the counterarguments are discussed in the last paragraphs of the essay. If you lack space for a lengthy analysis of counterargument, you may join it with its rebuttal in one paragraph.

Every body paragraph begins with a topic sentence, which, in other words, contains the main idea of the whole paragraph. Another hint for writing successful body paragraphs is including direct citations. Considering the fact that you are analyzing a literary work, quotes are especially important to support your argument. They do not only show that you are familiar with the original text but also demonstrate your profound understanding of author’s writing style and the hidden message. In addition, by using direct citations, you are proving that you understand all the literary theories and can find a variety of literary devices if it is required by the topic of your essay. However, the trick here lays in effective presentation of a quote. That is, in one sentence, you prepare the background for the upcoming direct citation. In the next sentence, you provide the very quote. Then, you discuss how this direct citation is relevant to the main idea of the paragraph and your argument. Subsequently, the readers will understand why you have used this particular quote in a particular paragraph.

Finally, the last paragraph of your argumentative essay is the conclusion. The first sentence of your conclusion has to coincide with your thesis statement. That is, you highlight your argument using different words. In the next sentences, you have to mention the main ideas of every body paragraph briefly. As a result, you will have a chance to summarize the whole essay and remind the readers about its main point. In the last sentences, you may suggest some implications for future research or analysis that has to do with your work.

Post-writing Tips (Editing/Proofreading, Referencing, etc.)

Once your essay is ready, apply some post-writing techniques, which are also significant for receiving a high grade. That is, I am talking about editing and proofreading. Even though these two processes seem to be rather similar, in fact, they are entirely different and require many efforts and patience. Editing is the first thing that you should do after you have finished working on your argumentative essay. However, it is more beneficial to spend at least one day not working on your essay before starting editing. As a result, your mind will be clear, and you will be able to identify all the mistakes and even logical fallacies. To be more precise, the process of editing is making all the necessary changes to enhance the quality of your writing as a whole. As a student, you may double check the guidelines to your argumentative essay (if any) and make sure that you have met all the requirements. What is more, you can also check the word count, structure, and organization of your essay. Eventually, you will polish your essay, so that it will look perfect and devoid of serious mistakes.

Proofreading is similar to editing but focuses mostly on grammar and language use. That is, when proofreading, you are only looking for grammar errors rather than to organizational and logical mistakes. As well as with editing, it is recommended to spend some time away from your argumentative essay, so that you can notice all the mistakes during proofreading.

Last but not least, referencing is also a significant part of the post-writing process, even though it has nothing to do with the main text of your argumentative essay. As well as choosing reliable scholarly sources before starting your essay, providing correct references to these sources is also a factor that will impact your grade. Referencing is a quite tricky thing because even missing one dot or slash is already a mistake. Fortunately, nowadays, there are many online services, where you can double check both your references and even in-text citations. Among them are: CiteThisForMe.com, BibMe.org, and CitationMachine.net.

------------------------------

https://education.seattlepi.com/write-good-argumentative-essay-introduction-1484.html

How to write a good argumentative essay introduction.

A good introduction in an argumentative essay acts like a good opening statement in a trial. Just like a lawyer, a writer must present the issue at hand, give background, and put forth the main argument -- all in a logical, intellectual and persuasive way.

Start With a Hook

Start your introduction with a sentence that gets the reader interested in the topic. To pique the reader's interest, you can begin with a quote, a personal story, a surprising statistic or an interesting question. For example, if you are arguing that smoking should be banned from all public places, you can start your introduction by referencing a statistic from a verified source: "Tobacco use kills more than five million people every year -- more than HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined, according to the World Health Organization." This strategy grabs the reader's attention while introducing the topic of the essay.

Include Background

Providing readers with background on the topic allows them to better understand the issue being presented. This information provides context and history that can be crucial to explaining and arguing your point. For example, if you are arguing that there should never be a military draft in the United States, your introduction can include information about the history of the U.S. draft and the events that led to it being abolished.

State Your Thesis

The thesis is the essence of an argumentative essay. In a single, clear sentence, it sums up what point you are trying to make. The thesis statement should assert a position on a particular issue -- one that a reader can potentially argue against. Therefore, the thesis cannot be a fact. For example, if a professor assigns the general topic of war, you can formulate the following thesis statement: "The United Nations must be redesigned because it is currently incapable of preventing wars." The rest of your essay serves to explain and provide evidence in support of your thesis statement.

What to Leave Out

A good introduction should not be describing arguments or providing analysis that belong in the body paragraphs. Your introduction should introduce and set up your point, rather than lay out evidence to support it. Also, while your intro is a road map for the rest of the essay, you shouldn't explicitly announce what and how you will be arguing: "I am going to prove to you that ..." This type of set up does not add any pertinent information and only serves as filler.

------------------------------------

https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Writing a Research Paper Introduction.

------------------------------------------------------

DOCUMENTOS DE APOYO:

(1) GRABACIÓN SOBRE LAS "INTRODUCCIONES" DE ENSAYOS ARGUMENTATIVOS. EJEMPLOS Y EXPLICACIONES. (Grabados en una clase del primer semestre de 2021).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wkIrUuS97IsptJ6DZpZmYYt0oYdJEc5r/view

(2) GRABACIÓN SOBRE LA FORMULACIÓN DE LA HIPÓTESIS Y LA ESTRUCTURA DE CONJUNTO DE ENSAYOS ARGUMENTATIVOS. EJEMPLOS Y EXPLICACIONES. (Grabados en una clase del primer semestre de 2021).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Iwz5nX5YccAiT5y0ua32Asx9MYq_MX2G/view

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCCIONES ejemplos.docx