Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  DERRIDA J.
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Is there still a literary theory?

100%
Burzynska A.
Teksty Drugie (Second Texts)
|
2006
|
issue 1/2(97/98)
40-57
EN
This article discusses the present-day status of literary theory. The title, provocative as it is, refers in the first place to the poststructuralist time, i.e. one of concentrated criticisms of theory as a literary-scientific discipline (particularly, the criticism on the theory of interpretation). Seen from today's perspective, the current is, perceivably, a modern (autonomous, objective, general, universal, etc.) theory revised - i.e. a theory which is to provide scientific foundations for literary scholarship whose model has expired, according to poststructuralists. It is also apparent that poststructuralism has yielded several important new directions contributing to certain thorough transformations in theoretical knowledge. These include the pragmatic turn (i.e. a definite withdrawal from essentialist issues), the narrativist turn (altered views on the language of theoretical utterance), the ethical-political turn (autonomy of theory challenged). Those transformations have led to the emergence of the present-day form of literary theory, i.e. cultural theory, being an open-ended collection of various cultural discourses being useful in interpretative practices (ethnical, racial, postcolonial, feminist, gender-studies-related, queer-theory-related, etc.), rather than a coherent or comprehensive theoretical system. In the recent years, we have observed a tendency of rendering literary study reoriented into interpretation, the latter becoming the major duty of a literary scientist. As for theory, it is about to become an auxiliary discipline, a 'knowledge for interpretative use'. This is confirmed, among others, by two most recent books on the status of theory in literary studies: 'life.after.theory' (interviews with J. Derrida, F. Kermode, T. Moi and Ch. Morris) and T. Eagleton's 'After Theory' (2003), both discussed at some length in the article's conclusive section.
2

KDE ZAČÍNA A KDE KONČÍ SVET ODPUSTENIA?

80%
Smreková D.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2007
|
vol. 62
|
issue 8
696-703
EN
The paper aims at a closer view at the most important aspects of somewhat radical, but enlightening response of J. Derrida (1930-2004) to V. Jankelevich's (1903-1985) approach to the problem of forgiveness, articulated as related to the exemption from the statue of limitations, concerning the crimes against humanity. The authoress focuses on two topics in the core of this polemics, the first one being the relationship between the exemption from the statue of limitations and the unforgivable, the second one being the roles of the conditioned and the unconditioned in the idea of forgiveness. Through the analysis of the fundamental assertions in Derrida's 'Pardonner: l'impardonnable et l'imprescriptible' and by confronting them with the ideas in Jankelevich's 'L'imprescriptible' the authoress comes to the following conclusion: The acceptance of forgiveness in its original meaning of a generous, but a rare gesture, independent of ulterior motives, should not hide the incurable evil present behind this gesture. Thus the evil can not turn banal and the moral duty of memory is still preserved.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.