Social Science


Literary History Goes Further

Authors: Ştefan VLĂDUȚESCU

The study investigates the current status of literary history; it focuses on the possibility, the status and the development potential of the literary history. This is seen, on the one hand, as discursive practice of aesthetic evaluation and as decoding speech, interpretation, hermeneutics decryption. On the other hand, the literary history is retained as fundamental concept of the theory of literature. It starts from the axioms of some of the fixed stars of the domain (George Călinescu, Rene Wellek, Augustin Warren), taking into account the positions already accredited of some distinguished contemporary literary critic (Nicolae Manolescu, Eugen Simion, Eugen Negrici), taking into account the assertions of some critics, historians and committed literary theorists (Mircea A. Diaconu, Iulian Boldea, Al. Cistelecan, Gheorghe Crăciun) and also are considered the opinions expressed by personalities in the making of the investigated field (Nicoleta Ifrim, Gabriel Coșoveanu, Ion Buzera, Ioana Andreea Mircea, Cătălin Ghiță, Sorina Sorescu). To clarify the issue, it proceeds to a triangulation, it appeals to a research methodology consists of three methods convergent used: the meta-analytic method, the historical method and the comparative method. The reached conclusion is that literary history is an actuality domain with great evolution perspectives. There are four arguments in the support of the conclusion, and therewith constitute factors that ensures the continuity and development potential of literary history: 1) the infinity of human aesthetic sense, 2) irrepressible improving of the critical spirit, 3) optimizing of reading standards and 4) functioning need and the canon reviewing.

Comments: 5 Pages.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2015-04-10 01:27:42

Unique-IP document downloads: 107 times is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus