As far as the play of language produces meaning from differance, meaning arises from the lack of authoritative, unique, absolute or central significance. In both their plots and their themes, Faulkner's novels often appear bereft of conclusive sense. The author whose literary ambition is to “leave a scratch on that wall - Kilroy was here” (Faulkner in the University 61) discovers the meaning of his works during the course of their composition. Meaning must await being said or written in order to inhabit itself, and in order to become, by differing from oneself what it is: meaning... It is because writing is inaugural, in the fresh sense of the word, that it is dangerous and anguishing.
In other words, they were fulfilling the sense of nation building not only on a dynastic level but also on a poetic level as well. And through this process, these texts also complicate and blur the line between different generic elements and consequently evolve as literary pieces that cannot fully contribute to either an epic, historical, or romance traditions. Although Romance tradition is usually regarded as the tradition of long poems, in the medieval sense they are also effectively the versions of the classic epic tradition and texts. Gawain and Green Knight and Arthur, similarly, are in a way quite interesting as they are not usual works of medieval romance. As instead they are fold into an epic framework throughout.
While Graff views this as an unavoidable contamination of “pure” reading, I believe this can also be viewed as a unique perspective that could be lost by an introduction to literary theory. Therefore, “pure” reading could be considered reading without the knowledge of literary theory because if one is unaware of the questions and perspectives that they bring to the text, they will be more likely to have their own ideas about a
Reliability is an intriguing topic within the world of literature due to the vast amount of speculation on what makes a narrator reliable or unreliable. It comes down to whether or not the narrator’s words are trusted. Ralph Ellison’s narrator in Invisible Man (I.M.) is not a reliable narrator. Within the novel, I.M.
Not only can one piece of writing be understood differently by its audience, but an author can interpret a certain topic in a completely unique way from another writer. This phenomenon can be seen in the two distinct pieces Superman and Me from The Most Wonderful Books: Writers on Discovering the Pleasures of Reading by Sherman Alexie and “Books are Dangerous” by Frank Furedi. Although Alexie’s short story is a personal narrative and Furedi’s article is essentially the opposite:
There is a general misconception that many people seem to have about marginalized associations, especially about marginalized literature: that they evoke sympathy and pity and use those emotions as a way of garnering attention from what is considered the mainstream culture. This negative judgment has resulted in many critics and cynical lay people slamming and condoning marginalized literature as an underhanded tactic to tug at vulnerable heartstrings. And the ongoing debate of what all can actually be considered to fall into the purview of marginalized literature remains unresolved. The Oxford Dictionary defines the term “Marginalize” as: to treat (a person, group, or concept) as insignificant or peripheral. While one may think of any class
in Lothe 2003: 16). What is more, Robert Stam comments on grammar-based terminology claiming that it creates confusion rather than clarity (2008: 35). Such an approach may misrepresent the fact that some writers, for instance, Flaubert, can shift person changing “the relation between the narrator and the fiction” (Stam 2008: 35). Stam claims that “more
History Portrayed in Literature vs. Informational Text If one has ever read the short story, “Rip van Winkle” by Washington Irving or the informational text “George vs. George” by Rosalyn Schanzer, one will notice how the short story is a piece of literature that takes place at a crucial point in history, and how the informational text takes place around that same time as well. However, that individual may not observe at first how the facts are presented and incorporated differently in each text. Literature uses a bias, is meant to entertain readers, and uses not all true information when talking about history. On the contrary, informational text is unbiased, its purpose is to inform the reader, and it always uses true information when talking about history. While both types may base their text off of actual events, they also both have many differences when presenting the information.
Works of literature are built from systems, codes and traditions which are established by previous works of literature. The systems, codes and traditions of other art forms and of culture are crucial to meaning of a work of literature. Texts are viewed by modern theorists as lacking in any kind of independent meaning. This is called intertextuality. A text is permutation of texts, an intertextuals in the space of a given text, in which several utterances, taken from other texts, intersect and neutralize one another.
Based on the previous studies, postmodernism is a certain style of thought with certain tendencies which goes against literary conventions and characterized by a heavy reliance on techniques like fragmentation, paradox, digression, disunity, pluralism, and ambiguity had overshadowed both of deconstruction and absurdism and this impact appears to be evident through various techniques adopted by both approaches.In fact, for deconstructionism, this partition, rupture of systems and decentering of human agency has slipped into self-referentiality of the text.But, for postmodernism, this abolishment of referentiality is a reconstruction of human agency as the human is free from the repression or closure of language. Also, the notion of free play