COMPAGNON Antoine O Demonio Da Teoria. Uploaded by letvl .. Pierre Nora - Entre a memória e a história a problemática dos llowponquoresmai.gq Uploaded by. O DEMONIO DA llowponquoresmai.gq Uploaded Download as PDF or read online from Scribd. Flag for .. Conteúdos e Métodos Das Ciencias Da Natureza 06 10 COMPAGNON, A. - O Demônio da Teoria [CAPÍTULO 1].pdf Download as PDF or read online from Scribd .. O Motivo Infantil Na Obra de Guimarães Rosa.

O Demonio Da Teoria Pdf

Language:English, Dutch, Hindi
Published (Last):02.07.2016
ePub File Size:17.73 MB
PDF File Size:14.21 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Uploaded by: ANNEMARIE

COMPAGNON, Antoine - O Demônio da llowponquoresmai.gq Uploaded by Marcílio F. Júnior. Save. COMPAGNON, Antoine - O Demônio da llowponquoresmai.gq For Later. save. [Antoine Compagnon] O Demônio Da Teoria - Literat(llowponquoresmai.gq). July 5, | Author: Alexandre Sousa Invalid or corrupted PDF file. More Information. ILUDINDO O DEMÔNIO – COMO A INFORMAÇÃO FÍSICA EXTREMADA SE. APLICA À A teoria da Informação Física Extrema (IFE), formulada pelo físico.

Allusion is thus exclusion. The university is going through a moment of hesitation concerning the virtues of general education, which is accused of leading to unemployment and which competes with vocational training, the latter being said to prepare people better for employment.

Your numbers seem to contradict my words, and this is an opportunity for me to apologize to you. However, although I am sorry on the one hand, I am delighted on the other, for your eagerness bodes well. Therefore, as we evoke the future of literature, let us be realistic and not defeatist. What is its strength, not only in terms of pleasure but also of knowledge, not only in terms of escapism but also of action?

These demands become more pressing after the time of the avant-garde, when faith in progress is in a lull. The technical challenges were at the forefront: the character was first restricted to the internal point of view or monologue, and then erased.

The New Novel rebelled against the analytical novel, poetry against the narrative, the Text against the author One looked neither back nor to the side, down to the side of popular literature, the drawing-room variety, the type that sells and that people read. All mention of the power of literature was judged obscene, for it was agreed that literature was pointless, and that all that mattered was its self-mastery. However, in our period of latency where confidence in the future in the form of progressivism is no longer on the agenda, evolutionism, on which literature has relied for at least a century, seems to be over.

If its history, its progress and its autonomous movement no longer legitimize literature, how should its authority be founded? As an exercise in thought and an experience of writing, literature corresponds to an undertaking of gaining knowledge about humans and the world. Such was for a long time the justification of ordinary reading and the premise of literary erudition. Has science disqualified them? So it has been said.


This long-lasting tendency supposedly began in the classical age, when the belles-lettres started losing large sections of discourse one by one, and literature gradually restricted itself to difficult fiction.

Snow and Lepenies took as an established fact the modern expropriation of literature, which had apparently lost its age-old prerogatives, first to the natural and life sciences, then to the social sciences and the humanities. The bad conscience of literary scholars has led to the situation where, by an amusing exchange of roles where everyone is miscast, it is the scientists who have often behaved as better supporters of the humanist tradition.

Today, as we are experiencing an upheaval of schooling that is as decisive as the turning point of , and which is no longer affecting classical culture and ancient languages but modern culture and French language, it is literary knowledge that we must rise up to defend.

Are these definitions still acceptable? If the question is being raised, could it be because it is already too late to answer it? It did not come up at the time when the power of literature was established and the issue was more about how to undermine it. Then, literary culture was supposed to make one a better person and to give one a better life.


According to Bacon, who concurred with Montaigne, reading avoids us having to resort to slyness, hypocrisy and treacherousness. It thus makes us true and sincere, or simply better people. Literature pleases and instructs. Further into the Poetics, catharsis itself, the purification or purging of passions through representation, results in a better life, both private and public Fables are not what they appear to be.

The merest animals can, pleasingly, Instruct by deed, not dull advice: we swallow Gladly their tales, whence must the precepts follow. To teach, to please Such is the aim twofold Behind these fictions.

For, if truth be told, To do no more than entertain, to tell A story for the story's sake seems, well, A trifle frivolous This role is exemplified in Manon Lescaut, the standard realist novel. That is why experience and example guide behaviour better than rules. Jaccottet, Seuil, With literature, the concrete replaces the abstract, and example replaces experience, to inspire general maxims or at least a conduct that is in conformity with such maxims.

Knowledge about oneself therefore presupposes the form of the narrative. A second definition of the power of literature, which emerged with the Enlightenment and was deepened by romanticism, made of it no longer a means of educating while pleasing, but a remedy. It freed individuals from subjection to authorities, so thought the philosophers, and it freed them in particular from religious obscurantism. Literature, an instrument of justice and tolerance, and reading, an experience of autonomy, contribute to freedom and to individual responsibility.

As a challenge to established authority, it reveals the extent of its power when it is persecuted. The result is an irritating paradox, which is that freedom is not favourable to it, because it deprives it of the servitudes to which it might resist.

Thus the weakening of literature in the European public sphere at the end of the 20th century could be linked to the triumph of democracy: people used to read more in Europe, and not only in the East, before the fall of the Berlin wall. If it alone can act as a social bond, it is indeed in the name of its disinterestedness and of its largesse in a utilitarian world characterized by productive specializations.

Universal harmony is restored by literature, because its own unity is attested by the completeness of its form, which is typically that of the lyrical poem. Thus literature, which is at once a symptom of and a solution for discontent in civilization, provides modern man with a vision that goes beyond the restrictions of daily life. One makes oneself sick from literature like Madame Bovary or Des Esseintes.

Although literature frees one from religion, it becomes itself an opium, that is, a substitute religion, according to the Marxist vision of ideology, for such is the ambivalence of any supplement. This is how great writers were recruited to serve the nation.

However, as this resistance confirmed the sublime disinterestedness of literature, it actually increased its virtue and in the end strengthened the confidence that society could have in its therapeutic abilities. According to a third version of the power of literature, it corrects the defects of language. They are artists. Kolb ed. Hidden from consciousness, it is immanent, singular and, until now, has been inexpressible.

Superior to philosophy, literature takes over from it and revives it. The dead past is embodied in a certain feeling. A philosophical study? Am I a novelist? By teaching us not to be fooled by language, literature makes us more intelligent, or intelligent in a different way. Entretiens, Odile J Michel Foucault never treats literature like a device of power in the same way he would the other discourses. Eluding their general regime, literature remains a preferred reference located outside of philosophy, free of the determinations to which the other discourses are subjected, and excessive.

Foucault showed that all discourses were in fact literature, but as only literature itself accepted its status, by a kind of poetical irony, it surpassed other discourses and kept its lofty position. I have quickly gone through the three powers of literature: placere et docere, reunifying experience, or mending language.

These have sometimes been misused or taken advantage of, and literature has not always served just causes. That is why, since Baudelaire and Flaubert, so many writers have been tempted to challenge any power of literature other than the one it holds over itself.

I am finally breathing! Reading can entertain, but the way a dangerous game can: it is not a trivial pursuit.

They judged literature to be pointless or even guilty, for it had not stopped the inhuman from occurring. From that moment on, art could no longer claim to redeem horror nor to make amends for life, and literature was banned. The work of Paul Celan or Samuel Beckett nevertheless testifies to its extenuated pursuit far from any desire for power. Considerate la vostra semenza: fatti non foste a viver come bruti, ma per seguir virtute e canoscenza Above all, however, turning the smallest use of literature into treason meant that people were no longer taught to confide in it, but to be wary of it, like a trap.

By becoming neutral or trivial, literature hoped to answer to the grievances that it had long sanctioned authorities, and above all, the nation states whose emergence it had facilitated.

In a universe fraught with decon- structionists and constructivists, both transform the literary text into the victim of their plots, which not coincidentally are constructed as parodies of the most modern attitudes of criticism and reading.

Suddenly, you say: Look at the page number.

Teoría de la novela

Calvino, , p. The author is alive. The meaning is still under the custody of someone who now ceases to be the one who arranges words on paper to become the one whose eyes travel over them. The reader becomes the author. Here is an interpretive hypothesis for the phenomenologies of the individual R. Ingarden and W. Iser and collec- tive H. Jauss and U. Eco reader. According to Booth, the author never retreats completely from his work.

He leaves in it a sub- stitute that controls it in his absence: The implicit author ad- dresses the implicit reader or the narrator the narratee. This approximation between author and reader is used especially by Um- berto Eco. His argument becomes a covert way of defending the supremacy of the author. In it, there is a con- stant recurrence to examples both personal and taken from The Name of the Rose. It is precisely the author of The Open Work who says: The way Eco b, p.

These postulates are unfamiliar to anti-intentionalist criticism. The text, considered as an autonomous code in relation to the author, has long stopped being considered a safe haven for the reader. The return to the author is thus characterized by both heterodox and tra- ditionalist positions. In the context of the reviews of intentionality, one of the strongest interpretations is a retrospective analysis conducted by Paul De Man back in the s, about the new criticism.

For de Man, American formalist critics seek to jointly defend poetry from deterministic instruments that sim- plify the complex relationship between theme and style.

A truly systematic study of the main formalist critics in the English language during the last thirty years would always reveal a more or less deliberate rejection of the principle of intentionality. For surfaces also remain concealed when they are being artificially separated from the depth that supports them. The partial failure of American formalism, which has not produced works of major magnitude, is due to its lack of awareness of the intentional structure of literary form.

De Man, p. Bloom ibid. These readings result in a deeper relationship between the notions of au- thorship and meaning, which is exemplarily applied by the criticism of Antoine Compagnon , for whom the presumption of intentionality remains in literary studies. The core argument of the French critic is to release oneself from having to decide between two extreme and opposite positions: For Compagnon, the intention is the only conceivable criterion of validity of the interpretation, but it does not identify with clear and lucid premeditation.

The critic argues that in a text one can seek what it says with reference to its own context of origin, as well as what it says with reference to the context contemporary to the reader. The alternatives, presented as such, cease to be exclusive and become complementary.

For Compagnon, understanding is recovering the intention, but there is no other greater evidence to accomplish this task than the work itself. The result of this line of thought is a deepening of this notion, as required by De Man in relation to Beardsley and Wimsatt. In this line of thought, intention differs from premeditation.

Compagnon makes use of a key concept for this discussion — that of inten- tion to act. What underlies the distinctions between the text and its intention is old fallacious opposition between thought and language. Once this distinction is abolished, intention becomes what is meant by the text, and no longer before it. From this perspective it is no longer the project, but the meaning. If for authors like Eco and Compagnon, terms like intentio operis and intention in act seem to solve the problem of intentionality through its adherence to the text, what is at stake here is a discussion broader than this, since intentionality is an aspect of authorship.

By relying on his obsession with getting rid of the dubiousness of critical thinking intentionalists vs. This article proposes to advance that investigation in a different direction. If there, discussing authorship has contributed to reading a poem by Pessoa and conse- quently the heteronomy system as a whole, the aim here is to follow the oppo- site path: This means, in other words, changing its discussion context: Let us recall that, by writing poems in different styles and producing differ- ent sets of ideas, Fernando Pessoa chose to produce characters with biographies, i.

He cast the horoscope of these characters and defined some of their interpretations. He ascribed sets of poems to them and subsequently got these creative characters to interact with each other through an exchange of correspondence that could express doubts, beliefs and different ways of argu- ing, to the extent of informing us about different worldviews.

More From Larissa Costa da Mata

Pessoa provided us, in short, with fictional contexts of production for his work through different authorships.

The expedient resulted in a fictional pact: When we read that Reis is devoid of affection, immobilized in relation to the fate of things, what comes to mind is a human being, an author, and a set of ideas of which this author is convinced and informs us about. Although resonances of this reading are still common today, a response to it was soon formulated. Aware of that, criticism was given the opportunity to rethink part of its vocabulary.

Caeiro is the style, the lyrical self resulting from those poems, without flesh or bone. Pessoa had skillfully given us the tools for that, not just for the metonimi- zation of his texts for us to refer to the work through the author: Thus, he did not introduce Campos to us as a shy intellectual; probably because the idea of a quiet man behind the organic fury of his initial verse do not translate into life; it does not help us, ultimately, to imagine, to worship his work as it is done with an idol.

These are lessons of time. Although we are not always interested in putting into practice this precept, we have learned that we must stop attempt- ing to see in the author the qualities of the man and to explain the work by the characteristics of the individual. A text can only express itself; this is the result.

In an attempt to replace the nonspecific and persistent look that treated the individual romantically as the target of an archeology of knowledge that could be described by an anthropological explanation, the glorification of an al- leged omnipotence of language had undoubtedly a liberal connotation. Today, however, this same attitude represents new taboos in our critical practices. Heteronomy, however, carries something older than that, and that at the same time surpasses it, because it materializes an illusion of life dictated by styles.

Note that this decentralization of the subject of the writing requires a deeper notion of authorship. This is because if we understand it like that, heteronomy ceases to be an original appeal to the prestige of a hypothetical author, to become a state of poetic concretion.

From the critical standpoint, this gives rise to a massive reversal of perspec- tive, because it implies thinking that Pessoa does not precede his poems, that he is not an author who feeds them on individual characteristics, but someone who becomes an author when coinciding with writing, in the act of enuncia- tion, and never before or after it.

Captured in language, it is not the voice that is expressed, but the author only when he present at the time of utterance. And utterance only lives and repeats itself in the act of reading. The heteronomic phenomenon lends authoring a new state of utterance legitimacy, in that it enables thinking of it as the production of a subject of the language, a subject who may even be imagined as an organic body and previ- ous to the text, but that was built and then thrown back by a genetic material formed by traits of style.

The biography of a writer is lies the intricacies of his style. It has become commonplace among critics to refer to authors such as Proust, Eliot, Borges and Calvino as writers-critics, i.

In Brazil, among pos- sible explanations for that the dialogue is still shy, when not unilateral, between the areas of Portuguese Literature and Literary Theory. This means, in short, that the concerns Pessoa has raised among his critics are generally concerns cir- cumscribed by Pessoa himself or by issues relating to the Portuguese tradition. The re-contextualization of the heteronomic problem in the field of debates about authorship, here understood as the core of modern Literary Theory, is capable of both providing an exclusive space for discussing some unique authors and requesting a step forward in the territory explored by the likes of Jakobson, Eliot, Wimsatt, Barthes, Foucault, Derrida and De Man.

A morte do autor. Brasilien- se, LIMA, L. Teoria da literatura em suas fontes. Rio de Janeiro: Objetiva, Kafka e seus precursores. Glo- bo, Exame da obra de Herbert Quain. O jardim de veredas que se bifurcam. Pierre Menard autor de Quixote.

Se um viajante numa noite de inverno. Nova Fronteira, A arte como procedimento. Teoria da literatura — formalistas russos. Porto Alegre: Globo, O autor.

Belo Horizonte: Editora da UFMG, A poesia. UFRGS, De MAN, P.Lima, , p.

A Bíblia Satânica – Anton LaVey

In many ways the anti-intentionalist theses prior to Barthes who is actu- ally the one who confiscates the authority of the investigation of the meaning did not affect the notion of authorship, but rather the explanatory methods of the text. Thus, it is necessary to modalize Bloom without simply discarding him. Queres ver?

Such a concep- tion suits criticism very well, the latter then allotting itself the impor- tant task of discovering the Author or its hypostases: It is all to the track if he asks a new institutionalism about 4th emailyour leakage -- or a higher TV Other communication. Reading can entertain, but the way a dangerous game can: it is not a trivial pursuit.

Above all, however, turning the smallest use of literature into treason meant that people were no longer taught to confide in it, but to be wary of it, like a trap.