{"title":"走向一种批评形态:文学批评方法分类的尝试","authors":"Martin Suryajaya","doi":"10.22146/poetika.v11i1.79438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the possibility of classifying approaches to literary criticism so that each critical position can be mapped to other critical positions. This article is not an application of a literary criticism approach to reading a particular literary work but an attempt to map the relationships between approaches to literary criticism so that the issues raised here are theoretical and methodological rather than practical. This research offers another alternative: a comprehensive and valuable classification can be obtained by classifying the formal elements of reading practice rather than the theme. The method used here is a morphological study in the spirit of Vladimir Propp (2009) applied to the modality of reading to overcome the limitations of thematic classification offered by M.H. Abrams (1971), Northrop Frye (2007), Yoseph Yapi Taum (2017), and Vincent B. Leitch (Veeser, 2021). Through a formal study of reading modalities (coverage, access relation, and semantic modality), a classification of critical approaches is obtained, modelled in the axis of reading: the axis of depth, width, and distance by which the critics approach the literary phenomena. Based on that model, the entire approach to literary criticism can be classified into eight octants of the cube of reading: narrow–close–surface reading, narrow–close–deep reading, narrow–distant–deep reading, narrow–distant–surface reading, wide–close–surface reading, wide–close–deep reading, wide–distant–deep reading, and wide–distant–surface reading. Each approach is positioned relationally with other approaches in the cube of reading, so the space for dialogue and comparison is always wide open. By demonstrating the morphological relationships between critical approaches, this research opens new possibilities for interpreting each critical position as a liminal one so that each position is always related to and transformed into another.","PeriodicalId":31482,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Poetika","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards a Morphology of Critique: An Attempt to Classify Approaches to Literary Criticism\",\"authors\":\"Martin Suryajaya\",\"doi\":\"10.22146/poetika.v11i1.79438\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examines the possibility of classifying approaches to literary criticism so that each critical position can be mapped to other critical positions. This article is not an application of a literary criticism approach to reading a particular literary work but an attempt to map the relationships between approaches to literary criticism so that the issues raised here are theoretical and methodological rather than practical. This research offers another alternative: a comprehensive and valuable classification can be obtained by classifying the formal elements of reading practice rather than the theme. The method used here is a morphological study in the spirit of Vladimir Propp (2009) applied to the modality of reading to overcome the limitations of thematic classification offered by M.H. Abrams (1971), Northrop Frye (2007), Yoseph Yapi Taum (2017), and Vincent B. Leitch (Veeser, 2021). Through a formal study of reading modalities (coverage, access relation, and semantic modality), a classification of critical approaches is obtained, modelled in the axis of reading: the axis of depth, width, and distance by which the critics approach the literary phenomena. Based on that model, the entire approach to literary criticism can be classified into eight octants of the cube of reading: narrow–close–surface reading, narrow–close–deep reading, narrow–distant–deep reading, narrow–distant–surface reading, wide–close–surface reading, wide–close–deep reading, wide–distant–deep reading, and wide–distant–surface reading. Each approach is positioned relationally with other approaches in the cube of reading, so the space for dialogue and comparison is always wide open. By demonstrating the morphological relationships between critical approaches, this research opens new possibilities for interpreting each critical position as a liminal one so that each position is always related to and transformed into another.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal Poetika\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal Poetika\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22146/poetika.v11i1.79438\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Poetika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22146/poetika.v11i1.79438","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究探讨了文学批评方法分类的可能性,以便每个批评立场可以映射到其他批评立场。这篇文章并不是将文学批评的方法应用于阅读一部特定的文学作品,而是试图描绘出文学批评方法之间的关系,因此这里提出的问题是理论和方法上的,而不是实际的。本研究提供了另一种选择:通过对阅读练习的形式要素进行分类,而不是对主题进行分类,可以得到一个全面而有价值的分类。本文采用了Vladimir Propp(2009)精神的形态学研究方法,将其应用于阅读情态,以克服M.H. Abrams(1971)、Northrop Frye(2007)、Yoseph Yapi Taum(2017)和Vincent B. Leitch (Veeser, 2021)提供的主题分类的局限性。通过对阅读方式(覆盖范围、获取关系和语义方式)的正式研究,我们得到了一种批评方式的分类,它以阅读的轴线为模型:深度、宽度和距离的轴线,评论家们通过它来接近文学现象。基于该模型,整个文学批评方法可以被划分为阅读立方体的八个八角:窄近表层阅读、窄近深层阅读、窄远深层阅读、窄远表层阅读、宽近表层阅读、宽近深层阅读、宽远深层阅读和宽远表层阅读。在阅读的立方体中,每一种方法都与其他方法相互关联,因此对话和比较的空间总是敞开的。通过展示批判方法之间的形态关系,本研究为将每个批判位置解释为一个阈限位置开辟了新的可能性,以便每个位置始终与另一个位置相关并转化为另一个位置。
Towards a Morphology of Critique: An Attempt to Classify Approaches to Literary Criticism
This study examines the possibility of classifying approaches to literary criticism so that each critical position can be mapped to other critical positions. This article is not an application of a literary criticism approach to reading a particular literary work but an attempt to map the relationships between approaches to literary criticism so that the issues raised here are theoretical and methodological rather than practical. This research offers another alternative: a comprehensive and valuable classification can be obtained by classifying the formal elements of reading practice rather than the theme. The method used here is a morphological study in the spirit of Vladimir Propp (2009) applied to the modality of reading to overcome the limitations of thematic classification offered by M.H. Abrams (1971), Northrop Frye (2007), Yoseph Yapi Taum (2017), and Vincent B. Leitch (Veeser, 2021). Through a formal study of reading modalities (coverage, access relation, and semantic modality), a classification of critical approaches is obtained, modelled in the axis of reading: the axis of depth, width, and distance by which the critics approach the literary phenomena. Based on that model, the entire approach to literary criticism can be classified into eight octants of the cube of reading: narrow–close–surface reading, narrow–close–deep reading, narrow–distant–deep reading, narrow–distant–surface reading, wide–close–surface reading, wide–close–deep reading, wide–distant–deep reading, and wide–distant–surface reading. Each approach is positioned relationally with other approaches in the cube of reading, so the space for dialogue and comparison is always wide open. By demonstrating the morphological relationships between critical approaches, this research opens new possibilities for interpreting each critical position as a liminal one so that each position is always related to and transformed into another.