The Return to/of Theory

Bibliographic Data

ID3893665
AuthorsKamelia Spassova (0000-0002-7920-7228, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume32
Issue1
Pages74-96
Publication date2021-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
Venuedifferences (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1040-7391 • E-ISSN: 1527-1986
PublisherDuke University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1215/10407391-8956960
OpenAlexW3169691407
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited35

In his paper "The Return to Philology," Paul de Man insists that philology and theory should not be in conflict, but should, rather, mutually enhance one another. This claim that the turn to theory is also a return to philology is explored in the context of the structure of language. In the last twenty to twenty-five years, the return to philology has been a dominant part of the Anglo-Saxon discourse of "world literature," which has turned away from theory. The return to philology is captured in a market-based adaptation of literature in terms of globalization, transnationalism, and translation. In his latest book The Birth and Death of Literary Theory (2019), Galin Tihanov recalls the legacy of classical literary theory and propounds the contemporary discourse of world literature as an unreflected continuation of this legacy as it was articulated in Viktor Shklovsky's and Mikhail Bakhtin's approaches to literature beyond language. Turning this legacy on its head, this essay focuses, rather, on language in literature. In a short-circuiting way, Roman Jakobson's linguistics and poetics and Erich Auerbach's nonnational-based philology can be seen as surprisingly close to one another

Archaeology · Art · Comparative literature · Linguistics · Literary criticism · Literary theory · Literature · Philology · Poetics · Poetry · Sociology · Comparative and World Literature · History · Philosophy · Russian Literature and Bakhtin Studies · Translation Studies and Practices

Tools

Open DOI