Taking Darwin metaphorically and literally: genres and sciences in a survival struggle
Tóm tắt
The tendency to emulate the nomothetic discourse of the natural sciences appeared in the history of genre theory, including that of Darwin’s evolutionary theory. According to both the positivist history of literary genres (Brunetière) and the materialistic-systemic approach (Moretti), the concept of evolution figures as an epistemic metaphor through which the discipline can re-conceptualize itself and thus achieve a scientific nomothetic character. During the present heyday of social Darwinism and global economism, the epistemological difference between the humanities and hard sciences is escalating into a struggle for the survival of both: the modern branch of literary Darwinism understands the theory of evolution literally and uses it to interpret literature (including its genres) as a phenomenon resulting from remote evolutionary adaptations of the human species. Neo-Darwinists advertise that a full harmonization of literary studies with the natural-science paradigm (“consilience”) will ensure the former’s survival; yet, they practice traditional literary interpretation, seeking in literary texts allegories of the biologically conceived “human nature.”
Tài liệu tham khảo
Baker, B. (2008). Evolution, literary history, and science. In S. Ruston (Ed.), Literature and science (pp. 131–150). Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
Boyd, B. (2005). Evolutionary theories of art. In J. Gottschall & D. S. Wilson (Eds.), Literary animal: Evolution and the nature of narrative (pp. 147–176). Evanston, IL: Northwestern UP.
Bricmont, J., & Sokal, A. (2001). Science and sociology of science: Beyond war and peace. In J. A. Labinger & H. Collins (Eds.), The one culture? A conversation about science (pp. 27–47). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Brown, J. R. (2001). Who rules in science: An opinionated guide to the wars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
Brown, W., & Fabian, A. C. (Eds.). (2010). Darwin. New York: Cambridge UP.
Brunetière, F. (1890). L’évolution des genres dans l’histoire de la littérature (10th ed.). Paris: Hachette.
Brunetière, F. (1922). L’évolution de la poésie lyrique en France du XIXe siècle (7th ed., Vol. 1). Paris: Hachette.
Carroll, J. (2004). Literary Darwinism: Evolution, human nature, and literature. New York: Routledge.
Carroll, J. (2005). Human nature and literary meaning: A theoretical model illustrated with a critique of Pride and Prejudice. In J. Gottschall & D. S. Wilson (Eds.), Literary animal: Evolution and the nature of narrative (pp. 76–106). Evanston, IL: Northwestern UP.
Collini, S. (1993). Introduction. In C. P. Snow (Ed.), The two cultures. Cambridge UP, pp. vii–lxxi.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection; or, the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.
Darwin, C. (1874). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex (2nd ed.). London: John Murray.
Dolinar, D. (1978). Pozitivizem v literarni vedi. Ljubljana: DZS, (Literarni leksikon 5).
Dolinar, D. (1991). Hermenevtika in literarna veda. Ljubljana: DZS, (Literarni leksikon 37).
Gottschall, J. (2008). Literature, science, and a new humanities. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gottschall, J., & Wilson, D. S. (Eds.). (2005). The literary animal: Evolution and the nature of narrative. Evanston, IL: Northwestern UP.
Habjan, J. (2011). Analiza svetovnih-sistemov in formalizem v literarni zgodovini. Slavistična revija, 59(2), 119–130.
Habjan, J. (2012). The bestseller as the black box of distant reading: The case of Sherlock Holmes. Primerjalna književnost, 35(1), 91–105.
Holm, P. H. (2003). Cognitive science, literature, and the arts: A guide for humanists. New York & London: Routledge.
Hoock, J. (2004). Historical, social and epistemological aspects of the ‘Sokal-Debate’. In M. Carrier, J. Roggenhofer, G. Küppers, & Ph Blanchard (Eds.), Knowledge and the world: Challenges beyond the science wars (pp. 307–321). Berlin etc.: Springer & Universität Bielefeld.
Juvan, M. (2008). Ideologije primerjalne književnosti: perspektive metropol in periferij. In D. Dolinar & M. Juvan (Eds.), Primerjalna književnost v 20. stoletju in Anton Ocvirk (pp. 57–91). Ljubljana: Založba ZRC.
Kelleter, F. (2007). A tale of two natures: Worried reflections on the study of literature and culture in an age of neuroscience and Neo-Darwinism. JLT, 1(1), 153–189.
Labinger, J. A., & Collins, H. (Eds.). (2001). The one culture? A conversation about science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Moretti, F. (2000). Conjectures on world literature. NLR, 1, 54–68.
Moretti, F. (2005). Graphs, maps, trees: Abstract models for a literary history. London & New York: Verso.
Moretti, F. (2006). The end of the beginning: A reply to Christopher Prendergast. NLR, 41, 71–86.
Pinch, T. (2001). Does science studies undermine science? Wittgenstein, turing, and Polanyi as precursors for science studies and the science wars. In J. A. Labinger & H. Collins (Eds.), The one culture? A conversation about science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Prendergast, C. (2005). Evolution and literary history: A response to Franco Moretti. NLR, 34(2005), 40–62.
Rehg, W. (2009). Cogent science in context: The science wars, argumentation theory, and Habermas. Cambridge, MA & London: MIT Press.
Roggenhofer, J. (2004). From science wars to science worries: Some reflections on the scientific conquest of reality. In M. Carrier, J. Roggenhofer, G. Küppers, & Ph Blanchard (Eds.), Knowledge and the world: Challenges beyond the science wars (pp. 293–305). Berlin etc.: Springer & Universität Bielefeld.
Snow, C. P. (1993) [1959]. The two cultures. With the introduction of Stefan Collini. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Spolsky, E. (2007). Frozen in time? Poetics Today, 28(4), 807–816.