Five Works of Theory You Should Consider Reading

[Dipanjan Maitra]

I think it's fucking mutual.When we say that literature which is dense,
allusive and simply 'difficult' we think of commentaries, annotations to
illuminate and clarify its obscure aspects. In this case if we think of
such annotations, paraphrases etc. as 'approaches to literature' that is
produced, even necessitated by the literary piece then can we not also call
it a 'theory' of it, one that helps us analyze the work? almost like a
meta-language, that appears to 'transcend' the literary work and offer its
analysis, exegesis as an objective footnote to it? In that case 'literary
theory' is as old as literature itself and not necessarily structuralist or
poststructuralist.
But is theory ever meta-linguistic? Take Derrida for in stance.Isn't much
of his work a series of commentaries, asides on literary, philosophical,
religious or even political works? In other words the fact that
deconstruction can be seen as NOT a concrete, *body* of work that
establishes its own hegemony of presence but simply as a *strategy* aimed
at philosophy, art (Derrida of course blurs any such distinctions) points
toward its own parasitical dependance on literature, art? For example he
speaks of Joyce's presence in his writing as a 'haunting'. Indeed even in
his thesis on Husserl, probably his first major academic publication he
puts in Joyce's *Finnegans Wake *to posit a crucial counter-example.
This 'dependance' is of course not restricted to Derrida. Where would
Oedipus and his complex be without Sophocles and the circuit of the
'letter' without Poe, or the 'sinthome' without Joyce, the 'carnivaleque'
without Rabelais? On the other hand many literary artists also base their
work or at least are influenced by theorists. Lacan's work features in the
'novels' of Philippe Sollers, Perec interrogates Saussurian linguistics in *A
Void* and of course Cixous and Kristeva are also known for their literary
output. I remember Eagleton saying at one point that not subscribing to any
theory is also a theory. Lastly I don't think the business of 'applying'
theory to literature helps much. It smacks of instrumental logic:
theory=subject, literature=object, you apply a to b and you get a nice
dissertation as product. It's got to be fucking mutual...

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>wrote:

> I think literature has made theory necessary. As writers have evolved
> increasingly sophisticated work, readers have found it necessary to analyze
> what is presented to them. Now, I vehemently agree that theory has got
> quite out of hand, and seems as prescriptive as descriptive (if not more
> so), but it is often still useful in offering approaches to understanding
> abstruse material. The more pertinent question as I see it is, does theory
> fuck with literature, or is the feeling mutual?
>
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Michael Fonash <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sincerely, not to be an antagonistic prick, but I have to ask, why is
>> Literary Theory necessary at all?  I've never understood it's presence
>> in the contemporary university.
>>
>> Mike F.
>>
>> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Cioran is worth reading and Stupidity, about which I learned of from a
>> > generally quiet
>> > plister, is a good book.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com>
>> > To: Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es>
>> > Cc: "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> > Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2012 1:59 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Five Works of Theory You Should Consider Reading
>> >
>> > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Matthew Cissell <macissell at yahoo.es>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Did this get forwarded because of the Pynchon mention?
>> >
>> > .... I'm thinking maybe Werner might have come across is for that
>> > reason (I got it from him, he posted it on Google+), it just seemed
>> > like a useful/possibly relevant, even, selection to me, is all.  All
>> > worth reading, depending, regardless of the blogger's
>> > descriptions/credentials/whatever.  I was particularly gald to see nt
>> > only Glas, but Syncope (though The Parasite, maybe Crack Wars,
>> > poissibly Borderlands might be more/most relevant here) ...
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> "Less than any man have I  excuse for prejudice; and I feel for all creeds
> the warm sympathy of one who has come to learn that even the trust in
> reason is a precarious faith, and that we are all fragments of darkness
> groping for the sun. I know no more about the ultimates than the simplest
> urchin in the streets." -- Will Durant
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120528/a954c1de/attachment.html>