Suchergebnisse

The Gothic writing has often been perceived as a form of Western fiction- making. This apparently is based on the fact that Gothic genre originated in Europe in the late 18th century and has been widely exploited in the West (Europe and North America). Contrary to these assumptions, it can be confirmed that Gothic mode has indeed been appropriated by many non–Western fiction writers. An in- depth interrogation of Nnedi Okorafor's, selected novels like 'Who Fears death', Akata Witch and The Book of Phoenix reveal that she does indeed appropriate Gothic elements. This article therefore critically examines aspects of Gothic tradition in Nnedi Okorafor's selected novels. It seeks to portray how unique Gothic motifs like monstrosity, villainy and morality have been appropriated, transformed and complicated in Nnedi Okorafor's selected novels 'Who Fears death', 'Akata Witch' and 'The Book of Phoenix'. This study found out that that the three motifs indeed exist in Okorafor's selected novels and are closely related. Gothic Monsters are generally implicated in subversion of social norms and nature. This often renders them villainous and their defeat, as portrayed in the analysed texts, leads to a restoration of moral order in a given society. Yet the findings affirm that physical or moral monstrosity of a character does not necessarily qualify her or him to be a villain. Villainy is tied to innate monstrosity which manifests itself through characters' inhuman, unjust, and oppressive attitude towards the perceived other. This piece therefore concludes that Nnedi Okorafor does indeed appropriate the Gothic motifs of monstrosity, villainy and morality in a manner that offers radically fresh means of highlighting Africa's complex reality.

In the article the main achievements of modern Belarusian theory of literature, textology and literary criticism are presented. The author draws attention to the results of scientific research by leading scientists of the Yanka Kupala Institute of Literary Studies – Yevgeny Gorodnitsky, Vladimir Gnilamiedov, Mikhail Tychino and others. The high scientific level of preparation of the Collected Works of Ivan Shamyakin and Ivan Naumenko is noted. The positive influence of critics who work in the Institute of Literary Studies on the development of modern Belarusian prose, poetry, drama and publicism is determined.

The purpose of the present paper is to study the impact of Cambridge Literary Criticism (CLC) on Chinese scholars, since the visit to Peking's Tsinghua University by Prof. Igor Armstrong Richards, the initiator of CLC, in 1929, until present times. That first encounter signed the beginning of a fruitful intercultural communication activity between the two countries, which lasted for a decennial. Those contacts between the British literary world, imbued with the scientific spirit that was the basis of 'Cambridge Criticism', was very stimulating for the Chinese academic world, of that was being born. Unfortunately, those contacts were forcefully interrupted in 1939, in the raging of the anti-Japanese war. They resumed, with fruitful results, toward the end of last millennium, when the Chinese government issued a "Program for Education's Reform and Development in China". In present times the new movement of 'Ethical Literary Criticism' is developing in China by initiative of Prof. Nie Zhenzhao, from Peking's 'Central China Normal University', who took inspiration from the works of the Cambridge literary critic Frank Raymond Leavis.

Post-World War II French critical theory was a key pivot-point in the renovation of Hispanic American literary thought during the 1960s and 1970s. Starting from a text by Nicolás Rosa and Foucault's concept of discourse, the article addresses the reception of said theory in Argentina, both in its political and epistemological dimensions, with a particular emphasis on the critical uses of that tradition, and the collective nature of the problematization of literature in relation to other practices and discourses.

Literature was never central to Brownson's interests; indeed at times it was something he tolerated somewhat impatiently.* He wrote about it regularly, however, and during his career filled over a thousand closely packed octavo pages on the subject. He could even use the cant of the journalist reviewer with professional facility. Of a novel called Thorneberry Abbey, for instance, he says, "It has one or two literary faults … efforts at fine writing, and wearisome descriptions of natural scenery, which … only interrupt the narrative." With variations in the details, this kind of formal gesture is repeated almost every time he reviews a novel. Moreover, the passage on Thorneberry Abbey appears towards the very end of a long review, introduced by the following candid admission: "But we have forgotten the little book before us." What precedes the remark is not primarily a literary discussion but rather a warning to Catholics against the dangers of unwary compromises with Protestantism. What follows the remark is literary in a perfunctory and conventional way and is quickly dropped in favor of more polemic discussion. Although this procedure is not true of every piece of criticism by Brownson, something like it happens often enough to make it characteristic. When he was accused of such irrelevance later in life, he defended himself vigorously: "The book introduced is regarded as little more than an occasion or a text for an original discussion of some questions which the author wishes to treat.… Books are worthy of no great consideration for their own sake, and literature itself is never respectable as an end, and is valuable only as a means to an end." In spite of this method, however, Brownson raised important critical questions and left a substantial amount of literary material.

The question posed by this text is: can we use Levinasian ethics in the field
of literary studies? In order to provide the answer, Levinas?s attitude
toward art will need to be analyzed. His work contains numerous scattered
remarks about literature and other arts, but the most explicit statement on
the relationship between art and ethics can be found in his essay ?Reality
and Its Shadow?. Since Levinas?s view on art in this essay is predominantly
negative, it poses a significant problem for the application of his theory
in the field of literary studies. In order to overcome this difficulty, I
use Blanchot?s reworking of Levinasian ethics, and open the possibility of a
different relation between literature and ethics than the one originally
suggested by Levinas.

This book explores the ways in which Bernard Lonergan's philosophy provides exactly the kind of support F.R. Leavis was hoping to find when looking for support for his critical approach to literature after failing to find the support he sought for his argument in the dominance of logical positivism at that time.