Report on Richard Shiff's essay, " Defining 'Impressionism' and the 'Impression' " (Based on class lecture by Anil.J.Pinto on 27th September, 2010) There is no proper generic approach to defining 'Impressionism' and the way Impressionistic style in art can be attributed to artists. Richard Shiff illustrates this idea by elucidating that it is difficult to define Impressionistic art, or for that matter, how artists can be classified according to the strictness of the genre. Art historians have rendered the title impressionism that rarely gives any exclusive definition that can be readily appreciated. There is no historical fixity or a continuum that can be assigned to be impressionistic. To consider who the real impressionists are, historians have looked into a simple classification: (1) Social group (2) artist’s subject matter (3) style or technique (4) purpose. Yet each of these categories has presented their own difficulties. An artist must, in order to be Impressionistic, associate with the group of artists who render similar thoughts. An artist might be labeled an “Impressionist” if the artist participates, voluntarily, in one of the social groups to get conferred. Artistic styles then may develop and become group styles, and if a person is too deviant, may become an individualist impressionist. Such professional association and personal sympathy made Degas an impressionist and Cezanne, another Impressionist, even though, modern critics find his style antithetical to Impressionism. Yet, Impressionism also existed outside the circles of the groups; the circle of the elite, such as the society of Salon. By such association, the Salon society declared Corot as a superior “poetic” kind of impressionist. It is in the subject matter of the art that art can be classified in genres. When they are classified in such a manner, Shiff comments, they lead to awkward inclusions and exclusions. By this standard a Stanislas Lepine was included with later impressionists, but today, he is rarely discussed as a genuine impressionist, because he lacks the the major stylistic characteristic of the impressionists – the unconventional bright colours. Theodore Duret who tended to use stylistic criteria in order to classify the various painters, excluded Lepine for just this reason when he wrote his early account of the Impressionist movement. Duret and Riviere implied that it had simply been necessitated by the concern for a more accurate observation of nature. Impressionism allows for individuality in to the perspectives of nature but also tends to depict that the colours drawn are from nature directly, to make it as close to nature. It is this “verisimilitude” that makes Impressionism a difficult genre to categorize because the particular sensation is all pervading. Impressionistic art, thus, is sense observation and self interpretation of the ultimate aesthetic goal. The definitions of the goal of impressionist art may indeed inform more purposeful distinctions in the other areas of investigation; yet one must take in account that early observers of the impressionists like Jules Castagnary and Theodore Duret, said that these artists hardly spoke about the goals and aims of their works. Castagnary in 1874 observed: “the object of art does not change, the means of translation alone is modified”. Shiff, throughout his essay, establishes the idea that an artistic theory, like Impressionism, cannot classify the modulus of art or bring into a strict pattern an artist’s intent and creation. Impressionism, as a analyzed from the essay, is thus a style of depicting, creatively and instinctively, not professionally, creating the first impressions that comes to mind when a particular strain of thought gets depicted. This manner or style was directed at something, at the expression of a fundamental truth, the “verite”, so often mentioned in theoretical and critical documents of the period. When impressionism was considered as depiction of naturalism, which was not new, these artists seemed to set the art apart by their technical devises. For the impressionist, as the name applies, the concept of impression provided the theoretical means for the approaching the relation of individual and universal truth. It may be just depicting the shallow waters or the primary layer of thought that a particular event or an aesthetic consciousness generates in an artist. Shiff is commendably exemplary when he distinguishes photography and Art in the context of Impressionism, as defining it to be an “imprint”. The elementary difference between photography and art is in the medium of reproduction, which is the essence of all art. Photography is capturing the moment in time as an imprint but art is always contoured by artists ego, the creative psyche and personal interpretation of the flux from where the artists draws inspiration. The "Impression" is always a surface phenomenon, immediate, primary, and undeveloped. Hence the term was used for the first layer of an oil painting, the first appearance of an image that might subsequently become a composite of many such impressions. It is in the ability to catch the primary idea of the flux that inspires the artist’s creativity that impressionistic art becomes successful. As primary and spontaneous, the impression could be associated with particularity, individuality, and originality. The artist’s ability to infer from the facts that generate aesthetic thought gives art its ingenuity. Impressionism is in the synthesis of nature and original sensation. In Deschanel’s usage, the term “impression”, which one might first regard as reference to very concrete external events, is extended into the more internalized realm of character, personality, and innate qualities. The romantic critic Theophile Thore similarly allowed the term to bridge the gap between the external and the internal, the physical and the intellectual or the spiritual, when he used it to explain how poetry differed from imitation. Poetry is not nature but the feeling that nature instills in a poet, the impression that gets recorded in a special language. In other words we can never have absolute knowledge of the external world in the manner one does have absolute knowledge of an impression: it would reveal as much truth about the world as an impression does. The self of the artist in any form of art cannot be denied because it forms the essence of all artistic interpretation, though the artist plays the role of an observant spectator, which also entails an investigation into the concepts of the genre. The ‘impression’ then can be both a phenomenon of nature and of the artists own being. It was not until the nineteenth century that psychology, the study of sensation, emotion, and thought came to be recognized not only as a branch of metaphysics, but as natural science, as an area of empirical research, into the physiology of perception and then in turn, to impression. A standard definition of impressionism was in accord to David Hume’s use of the term that "impression is the effect produced on the bodily organs by the action of external object." Shiff also warns us about us misjudging impressionism with symbolism, where the latter depends more on hidden layers of meaning or interpretation. Shiff does this by drawing a clear distinction between Manet and Monet’s artistic depiction of thought patterns. Where Manet’s depiction of impressions on the mind was objectively portrayed by solid brush strokes, monet was subjective to his aesthetic rendering. The essay is conclusively remnant of the theory that art is a projection of the artists self and this must be true to the nature of creation. Impressionism is then, perhaps the artist’s impression on nature and not nature’s impression on the artist. By Pritha Biswas I MA in English with Communication Studies Christ University |
This blog is an experiment in using blogs in higher education. Most of the experiments done here are the first of their kind at least in India. I wish this trend catches on.... The Blog is dedicated to Anup Dhar and Lawrence Liang whose work has influenced many like me . . . .
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Richard Shiff's essay, " Defining 'Impressionism' and the 'Impression' "
On Sociolinguistics/ Anil Pinto
Notes by: Sneha Sharon Mammen
Socioloinguistics is a study of language in relation to societies that is language that functions within a society. Mr Pinto says that sociolinguistics is all about the power game where language always finds something superior to its standards, unlike Phonetics which takes a neutral stand.
Within Sociolinguistics we study three broad categories :
1) Language Variety encompassing
a) Dialect
b) Accent
c) Register
d) Jargon
e) Style
f) Gender
g) Ideolect and
h) Taboo words
2) Language Change, encompassing the followings contexts of change:
a) Bilingualism
b) Multilingualism
c) Code Switching
d) Code mixing
e) Pidgin/ Creole
3) Saphir- Whorf Hypothesis
The question as of now is what exactly is the difference between Linguistics and Sociolinguistics? While the former deals with the form and structure of language like Morphology, Phonology, Syntax, the latter studies language within its societal context and largely in the domain of the spoken language.
However, in a society there is no one language. For example, you might be acquainted with the 44 sounds of English (
Language therefore keeps changing with respect to time, gender, area, sex and so. We ourselves are not speakers of either chaste Hindi or English.
Under the former categories, we study the following divisions:
a) DIALECT: is a variety of language distinguished according to region and social class.
Region---------) All languages have regional varieties.
Social class-------) 1) on the basis of literacy (educated or not)
2) language of the rustic. ( as also caste structures and special varieties.
In Karnataka itself you could identify people on their geographical grounds in terms of the kind of language variation that they speak.
b) ACCENT: variation in pronunciations that might either be because off regional differences or cultural. Even in
c) REGISTER: is the topic oriented varieties of language, commonly occupational varieties such as that of lawyers, medicine, in educational systems (the terms of Literary Theory is specific: mimesis, catharsis etc). It is also important to note that the registeral variety uses a lot of jargons.
d) JARGONS: As mentioned above, registeral language also uses a lot of jargons that is technicalities with respect to activities. It aids to decide who is an outsider and insider of a trade. The terms ‘subject’ or ‘subjectivity’ or other jargons like that used among the naxals, lawyers, journalists, psychology students and the like.
e) STYLE: is the individual usage of language depending on situations and role relations. Martin Joos in 1962 had propounded the five styles used in the English language.
a) Frozen- “ Visitors should make their way straight upstairs”
b) Formal- “ Visitors should …… at once”
c) Consultative- “ Would you mind taking the way upstairs..”
d) Casual- “ Its time you go upstairs”
e) Intimate- “Up you go chaps”
The style varies according to the relations, official relations, parent-child relations etc. Style could be morphological, lexical and the like where the structure changes but the verb order remains the same.
f) GENDER: According to researches, women use more prestigious, formal language when compared to men.
The men and women ,Amer- Indians in
In research again, it was noticed that men and women discuss varied topics during a conversation. While women gave vent to their personal feelings, men took to talking about news, politics, sports etc. Interestingly, it was also seen that if a third person talked of his/her problems to a man and a woman at the same time, the man would rationally try to advise while the woman took to recalling situations of the same kind which might have happened to her or heard in the past.
Also, hidge words (‘a kind of’, ‘a sort of’) and tags (isn’t it) were used more by women.
g) IDEOLECT: personal dialect of an individual speaker, (the I-DIALECT that is). It consists of gestures, words, pronunciations and voice quality.
h) TABOO WORDS: words which are forbidden in the socal context.
It could be categorized under filthy and clean or pure usage of words. For example while ‘fuck’ is the filthy usage, ‘intercourse’ remains the clean way. Interestingly, English being a Germanic language credited to have emerged from the Anglo Saxons, many of the raw and filthy words we hear today were the actual English version of the euphemisms we currently have been using. For example, the terms ‘cunt’, ‘cock’, ‘prick’, ‘tits’ or ‘shit’ today have been modestly replaced by ‘vagina’, ‘penis’, ‘nipples’ and ‘faeces’, however it does not sideline the real origins of the original words.
It has much to do with the social hegemony and the power of language to push the ‘other’ ‘low standard’ usage aside and therefore even the terms filthy and clean are quite regionally decide. Swear words in themselves are not pan Indian which is a result of our differences in cultural experiences.
Another reason why taboo words were forbidden was because many a times it was considered inauspicious to use it. For example, a tribe in Mangalore does not call a cobra by its name, rather they think it wise to call it ‘the good one’ so that it helps prevent unfortunate incidents and mishaps/ calling it a good one in their belief ascertains that it might not harm anyone.
Similarly, the hindi usage of the term ‘woh’ as in ‘pati, patni aur woh is generally used for a mistress and is sometimes carefully avoided so as not to appear disrespectful.
‘Babe’ ‘Chick’ have social taboo orientations while the usage of ‘They’ or ‘them’ corresponding to ‘woh log’ to discriminate between people of another sect or religion are religious taboo words.
Again, in some parts of the country people do not call certaion illnesses like chicken pox, small pox or measles by names. They generally find it favourable to call it by terms like ‘mataji’ perhaps to seek her blessings and escape the threat of suffering.
We now come under the second broad category: LANGUAGE IN CONTEXT/ LANGUAGE CHANGE OR LANGUAGE VARIATIONS. Under this head we study the following:
a) Bilingualism/ Multilingualism- When people with different cultural linguistic backgrounds reside in the same geographical space sharing the same socio-economic and political activities, bring in the functioning of bilingualism and multilingualism. For example, Bengaluru today is a multilingual state with Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Hindi, English, Bengali and Kannada speaking people residing here in large numbers. Canada too has French and English, so is the case with Brazil or even Singapore where people talk Malay, English, Tamil etc. The question is: who speaks what language and to whom. Whereas at home we might use our mother tongues, in official and institutional circles, we tend to use the official language of communication.
b) Code Switching/ Code mixing: Individual switching from one
language to another in a conversation. While code mixing means using words from another language, code switching means usage of an entire sentence in a different language. Example: “You are right. Unlogo ki angrezi achi ho jati hain, lekin ye jo subjects hain, science, mathematics, they become very weak”
c) Pidgin/ Creole: simplified link languages which arise due to
contact between the ruler and the ruled or when languages of two groups of people come in contact for reasons of trade and commerce. Schuchardt in 1891 in his reading talked of :
1) The
2) Pidgin English of
3) Boxwallah English of
4) Chee Chee English
5) Babu English.
Later in the 1980’s even Priya Hosani talks of the varieties of
If a large number of people talk Pigin, it becomes Creole. Amitav
Ghosh in his ‘
Language which was again a language used for trade purposes.
The last broad category is the Saphir-Whorf Hypothesis where Edward Saphir and Benjamin Whorf come together to highlight a proposition that language shapes a person’s worldview. For example, certain communities have every word in its language designed either to be an animate or an inanimate. As in Hindi yu have either masculine or feminine, English takes into consideration even the neutar gender and has terms like ‘it’. Talking of this community, the inanimate are those that do not have life and hence could be hurt. The animate whereas are supposed to have life and should not be inflicted with pain. For this reason, they might even consider a stone as animate and hence not use it in an uncaring fashion.
Therefore, it is the construction of language in a certain way and the cultural understanding of language that frames our thought. Even to this date, the Christians believe that the Eucharist is animate and hence you should take the bread and wine, the supposed flesh and blood of Christ in a manner that projects reverence.
Worship of images of Gods and Godesses could also fall under this category.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Call for Papers: UGC National Seminar on Language and Technology
Organized by Department of English, Malabar Christian College, Calicut
DATES: 4-5 October 2010
VENUE: Malabar Christian College, Calicut, Kerala
The English language is always evolving to meet the demands of its global users. As an international language, English accommodates the unique needs of world communities. This uniqueness has been enhanced with the introduction of new technology. English language teachers are on the threshold to exploring new frontiers and possibilities. The younger generation is equipped with content-rich gadgets. As teachers we need to help them hone their skills and make them better citizens of tomorrow. We need to bring technology into the language classroom as we celebrate diversity while ensuring intelligibility.
The seminar intends bring together English Language Teaching professionals from around the country to discuss, reflect on and develop their ideas. The program will offer many opportunities for professional networking and development. It will involve two days of talks, workshops, and panel discussions on the following theme:
Application of technology in modernizing teaching context.
For more information regarding submission of papers and registration, please contact:
Dr Premanand ME
Conference Chairman
Email: nsltcalicut at gmail.com
Phone: 09496217778
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
The Young Housewife
William Carlos Williams (September 17, 1883 – March 4, 1963) was an American poet closely associated with modernism and Imagism. He was also a pediatrician and general practitioner of medicine, having graduated from the University of Pennsylvania. Williams "worked harder at being a writer than he did at being a physician"; but during his long lifetime, Williams excelled at both.
“The Young Housewife”
The poem follows a chronological order and it is in a narrative style. It consists of four sentences and follows a first person narrative. This poem comes under the genre of experimental poetry. Carlos is often known as an “Imagist Poet”.
“THE” young housewife refers to a particular women; it is a pictorial story/representation of a women’s life. This woman is “gazed” as a desirable object by the narrator. Negligee worn by her can also be compared as “negligently” dressed. The narrator claims that he passed solitary on his car; referring to a possibility that he is not generally accustomed to travel alone.
In the first stanza, we see her within the boundaries of her husband’s house wherein she is wondering about in a negligee. A question which arises is, how does the poet know about this fact. Then again she came out to meet the ice-man and the fish-man; there is emphasis on the “man” she meets in the absence of her husband.
Her dressing has been elaborately described by the poet. She was un-corseted with her hair unkempt to which he compares her to a FALLEN LEAF. There is two possible explanations for this- one refers to her aesthetic body, to which she pays no attention to. Another refers to the possibility of her being “fallen” from grace as she is no longer fresh, not a virgin anymore. There is a sexual imagery wherein the poet might consider her to be a commercial sex worker (reason might be her contact with other man and also as she was un-corseted). Also another point to notice is that sexual organs or sexuality is present in terms of shrubs, “Leaf”.
The last stanza has an imagery of sound/auditory, “crackling sound over dried leaves”. There is a silence in the ending which might indicate the sexual intercourse between the poet and the woman. The silence is mysterious and the poet offers no reason for his smile. Also, the fact that he drove his car over DRIED LEAVES might indicate that his use or need for her was over. It displays a derogatory image of women as previously he had considered her to be a fallen leaf.
There is a conflict whether the poem is “De-feminising” in nature due to the status given to the women by him; i.e as a fallen leaf and dried leaf. On the other hand, few critics consider this poem to be from a feminist point of view as the poem is based on a woman’s life, there is a lot of importance given to her; The poem deals with a WOMAN’s and not a man’s sexual conquest.
Reference
Pinto, Anil. 'Analysis of 'The Young Housewife.'' Christ University. Sep. 2010. Lecture.
William Carlos William. 'The Young Housewife.' N.p. N.d.
MA English - Western Aesthetics CIA III - Audio-Visual Presentation
1) Rohit S Nair's presentation on Terry Eagleton's "Capitalism Modernism and Postmodernism".
2) Sebin Justine's presentation on Dick Hebdige's "Postmodernism and the 'Politics' of Style".
3) Ankita Das' presentation on Hal Foster's "The Primitive Unconscious of Modern Art".
4) Arya Augustine's presentation on Peter Burger's "On the Problem of Art in the Bourgeois Society".
5) Basreena Basheer's presentation on Raymond William's "When was Modernism?"
6) Mariya Izzy's presentation on Pierre Bourdieu and Alain Darbel's "The Love of Art".
7) Pannaga S.G.'s presentation on Raymond William's "The Works of Art Themselves".
8) Pritha Biswas' presentation on Richard Shiff's "Defining Impressionism and the Impression"
9) Ritu Kedia's presentation on Clement Greenberg's "Modernist Painting- An Essay".
10) Ruchira Dutta's presentation on Edward Said's "Orientalism".
11) Shanthi Joseph's presentation on Serge Guilbauts' "Adventures of Avant Garde in America".
12) Shilpi Rana's presentation on Lucy R Lippard's "Mapping".
13) Sneha Roy's presentation on Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction".
14) Sneha Sharon Mammen's presentation on Timothy Clark's "Olympia".
15) Sreetama Ghosh's presentation on Stephen Eisenman's "The Intransigent Artist".
16) Surya Simon's presentation on Antony Giddens' "Modernity and Self Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age".
17) Triveni Waikhom's presentation on Frederic Jameson's "Aesthetics and Politics".
18) Vachiraporn Pharin's presentation on Alan Wallach's "The Museum of Modern Art Past's Future".
19) Vandana's presentation on Benjamin H. G. Buchloh's "Figures of Authority: Cipher's of Regression".
20) Ananta Pradhan's presentation on Yve Alain Bois' "Painting: The Task of Mourning".
21) Anjan Behera's presentation on Philip Leider's "Literalism and Abstraction: Frank Stella's Retrospective at the Modern".
22) Geeta Lakkannavar's presentation on Griselda Pollok's "Vision, Voice and Power- Feminist Art History and Marxism".
23) Chandu's presentation (Part 1 & Part 2) on Theodore Adorno's "Art, Autonomy and Mass Culture".
24) Shushma Patil's presentation on Philip Leider's "Literalism and Abstraction: Frank Stella's Retrospective at the Modern".
As per YouTube's requirement, your web browser must have the Adobe Flash Player plugin to view the videos. For downloading the software, click here.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Digital Initiatives in Higher Education
Guest Lecture on Indian Psychology by Anup Kumar Dhar
Monday, September 06, 2010
A Response to Jijo's write on Zizek
Click here for Jijo's write up
----
Thursday, September 02, 2010
II Year JPEng Questions from American Literature Course
Monday, August 30, 2010
'When was Modernism'/ Report / MA Previous
Report by: Basreena Basheer
Raymond Williams was a welsh academic, critic and novelist. He is widely credited for the introduction of cultural studies and the cultural materialistic approach. His major works include Culture and Society (1958), The Long Revolution (1961), Marxism and Literature (1977).
In the lecture that was given on 17 March 1987 at the
In his lecture, Williams tries to confiscate the romantic element off the modernist movement. One problem with the selective appropriation of the movement is that in giving credit to only few writers who departed from conventional writing tradition, the older traditional writers are ignored. What is being overlooked here is the fact that without the older traditional writers, modernism could not have happened. In Williams’ words, “writers are applauded for their denaturalizing of language, their break with the allegedly prior view that language is clear, and for their making apparent in the narrative the problematic status of the author and his authority. But in excluding the great realists, this version of modernism refuses to see how they devised and organized a whole vocabulary and its structure of figures of speech with which to grasp the unprecedented social form of the industrial city.”
One possible explanation for this selective appropriation according to Williams was the change in the media of cultural production in the late nineteenth century and their ideological consequences. Photography, cinema, radio and television were gaining wide scale importance during that time. The public was getting increasingly drawn by these new mediums. Hence the sudden change in the field of arts and aesthetics was a reaction reacting to the sudden progression of media as an effort to defend their own territories. Therefore innovations like the stream of consciousness, interior monologue and the like.
In addition to this, this so called cultural reformation occurred only in the metropolitan cities, the new centers of imperialism such as
WORKS CITED:
Pinto, Anil. Lecture notes.
Williams, Raymond. “When was Modernism?” Art in Modern culture: An Anthology of Critical Texts. Eds. Francis Franscina, and Jonathan Harris.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Williams.nd.web.09 august 2010
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/amroth/scritti/willaims.htm.nd.09 august 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
MA Western Aesthetics CIA 3 - Audio-visual Presentation
How to Approach Your Research- For MA Previous
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The digital classroom is here - Bangalore - DNA
The digital classroom is here - Bangalore - DNA by Shruti Gautham on 23 Aug 2010
Blogging and pinging a change by Noopur Raval on 23 Aug 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Global Virtual Conference on Technology for Blended and Distributed Education
Live blogging by CoverItLive. The conference is also being streamed live on UStream.tv
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Mid Semester Materials for V semester students of Literary Theory
V Semester Literary theory class notes 2
Structuralism notes by Anusha R.
Ferdinand De Saussure
Syntagm and paradigm
Claude Levis Strauss
Related links
Mapping the essay (Saussure
Levis Strauss
Humanist Literary Theory
Formalism
mid sem portions
works of Terry Eagleton
Literature as a construct
Birith of literature
Creative writing and Day Dreaming by Freud
more of Creative writing and Day dreaming
Psychoanalytic Approach
What is Literature by Terry Eagleton
What is literature?- Terry Eagleton
Mr. Pinto said "if there is any theory answers this question it must encompass all its dimensions, and even if one of the dimensions is missing the theory fails.
Terry Eagleton, in his essay challenges all the definitions of Literature that have been put forth and challenges the basic understanding of literature that we have. In fact he rejects the idea of any "basic understanding" of what is literature.
Literature as Imaginative writing
- He begins with Literature being defined as imaginative writing.
- With imaginative/fictional/creative writing such as works by Shakespeare, Milton etc. other works which were not exactly fiction or imaginative writing were included as a part for English Literature. Example: Sermons of John Donne, Madame De Sevigne's letters to her daughter, philosophy of Descartes and Pascal.
- There was no clear distinction between 'fact' and 'fiction'.
- In the late 16th and early 17th century 'novel' used both factual and fictional events and even news reports were not considered purely factual.
- Genesis read as fact by some and fiction by others. Therefore no clear cut difference between fact and fiction.
- Moreover if one still goes by this definition, there are many works of fiction that are not considered to be Literature. Example: Mills and boon, Superman comics, Sidney Sheldon.
- "If literature is 'creative' or 'imaginitive' writing, does this imply that history, philosophy and natural science are uncreative and unimaginative?"
Literature as 'writing' that uses peculiar language
- It is because Literature uses the language in peculiar ways that it is different from everyday 'normal' way of speech.
- Roman Jakobson, speaks of Literature as "organised violence committed on ordinary speech".
- Disproportion between signifier and signified: A mismatch between the signifier and the signified. For example when in Macbeth you read the line "tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow..." you know that the character is talking of eternal bore dome and not of the literal meaning of the word 'tomorrow' therefore creating a mismatch in the signifier (tomorrow) and the signified (the next day).
- By bringing in peculiarity the language draws attention to itself. This is the reason when you read a fairy tale that starts with "Once upon a time..." you know that there is no real history associated with the line but it refers to a time in the story therefore drawing attention to itself or the text present in front of you.
- "The formalists started out by seeing the literary work as a more of less arbitrary assemblage of 'devices' , and only later came to see these devices as interrelated elements or 'functions' within a total textual system.
- These devices included imagery, sound, rhythm, syntax, metre, rhyme, narrative techniques etc.
- These devices were used as literary elements to 'defamiliarise' or 'estragement'.
- In other words "It was language 'made strange'; and because of this estrangement, the everyday world was also suddenly made unfamiliar".
- What he is trying to imply here is that in our everyday routine we get so used to the usual things that we hardly notice them, we become "as Formalists would say 'automatised', Literature, by forcing us into a dramatic awareness of language, refreshes these habitual responses and renders objects more perceptile."
- By defamiliarising or alienating us from the text or ordinary speech gives a fuller understand or a kind of revelation or the same experience. Its like after you have a fight or an argument, you sit alone and do a flashback of what happened and you try to hear your own words and put yourself in the other person's shoes and realise the damage that you might have done by saying certain things. In this process you are looking at your behaviour from outside, or other person's perspective, hence estranging yourself from you, and in the process gaining a better understanding of yourself.
- "Most of the time we breathe in air without being conscious of it: like language, it is the very medium in which we move. But if the air is suddenly thickened or infected we are forced to attend to our breathing with new vigilance and the effect of this may be a heightened experience of our bodily life.”
- Then literature was looked by the formalists as a 'special' kind of language in contrast to the 'ordinary' language that we commonly use.
- But the problem here arises is that there is no universal 'ordinary' language. In other words the so called ordinary/common language is different for different classes, gender, region, status and so on.
- "One person's norm may be another deviation"
- Same is the case with 'estrangement' mentioned earlier. A piece of writing might estranging is one context or community but not so in certain other. Example: in a particular society if everyone uses the sentence "shall I compare thee to a summer's day.." in everyday life it will not be estranging to that society anymore.
- "Anyone who believes that 'literature' can be defined by such special uses of language has to face the fact that there is more metaphor in Manchester than there is in Marvell. There is no 'literary' device - metonymy, synecdoche, litotes and so on- which are not quite intensively used in daily discourse"
- Another reason why considering 'estrangement' as the definition is problematic is that any piece of writing or sentence can be read as estranging.
- Example: a sign that reads -'Dogs must be carried on the escalator.' as unambiguous as it seems at first a close look at it reveals its ambiguity. Does it mean that you must carry a dog on the escalator, and in failing to do so you will be banned from the escalator?
- Also a drunk person may see hidden meanings in various hoardings or even road signs giving it cosmic significance.
- When we read a poem referring to a woman as lovely as a rose, the poet is telling about women and love in general. Therefore we look at literature as non-pragmatic/practical as against a physics textbook.
- The problem with this way of defining is that non-practicality of a text cannot be defined objectively. Which means that it depends on how a reader prefers to read the text.
- A reader can prefer to read Gibbon's account of Roman empire for information or prose style and so on.
- "A piece of writing may start off like life as history or philosophy and then come to be ranked as literature; or it may start off as literature and them come to be valued for its archaeological significance."
- "What matters may not be where you came from but how people treat you."
- Therefore, Eagleton says, there is no essence of literature because any writing can be read non-pragmatically.
- Consider literature as being a highly valued kind of writing. If this were true, then any writing can be considered as literature. For me a letter written by my mother to be will hold a value higher than any piece of writing by Shakespeare. Therefore a value given to any writing must be subjective.
- Values on the other hand are variable and change from time to time.
- "The so-called 'literary canon', the unquestioned 'great tradition' of the 'national literature', has to be recognised as a construct, fashioned by particular people for particular time. There is no such thing as a literary work or tradition which is valuable in itself, regardless of what anyone might have said or come to say about it."
- By which Eagleton suggests that the value that any writing enjoys is the value given to it by certain literary canon, or authority and is subject to change.
- Yet here he also says that value- judgements are unstable does not mean that they are subjective.
- Value-judgements depends on the value system and social ideologies that one belongs to.
I think that this a very clear case of what Derrida calls Deconstruction, where Terry Eagleton has picked 'literature' and by taking all the existing definitions he has proved that there is nothing called literature.