Miscellaneous Chatter > Literature

Philosophy or Literature?

(1/2) > >>

What Came Before:

--- Quote from: lockesnow ---http://www.partiallyexaminedlife.com/2012/09/24/a-belated-rant-against-literature-as-philosophy-featuring-murakamis-iq84/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+partiallyexaminedlife%2Fblog+%28The+Partially+Examined+Life+Blog%29&utm_content=Google+Reader


--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---Your life is made out of the days it’s made out of. Nothin else. You might think you could run away and change your name and I don’t know what all. Start over. And then one mornin you wake up and look at the ceilin and guess who’s layin there?

--- End quote ---
But really, if this claim were made outside of a literary context, would we really have even thought it noteworthy? How could one argue for, or against, such a claim? It’s pretty much self-explanatory. I think philosophy is often brought in as a literary tool, but ultimately what makes it good literature is not the quality of the philosophy in it. The better the book is, in fact, the less likely we are to notice when its uses of philosophy are fatuous. It’s as if we as philosophers are so tickled when someone outside of a the context of an academic philosophy paper name-drops Nietzsche, or even reflects about God or freedom or whatever that we get all glowy inside, as if the work has given us the secret handshake for our geeky philosophers’ club. If a fiction writer, like Sartre or maybe Camus (and keep in mind that even those guys are often considered lightweights when compared to a dude like Husserl), really has the philosophical goods, then chances are, you’re going to see it spelled out in actual treatises. If you don’t see this, then you’ve most likely got a philosophical debutante, a dabbler, someone who may be a great observer of human nature but can’t actually concoct a coherent theory or two to express these insights.
--- End quote ---

--- End quote ---

What Came Before:

--- Quote from: Callan S. ---Probably off topic but

--- Quote ---but can’t actually concoct a coherent theory or two to express these insights.
--- End quote ---
This human observer notes a....how to put it in my incoherant way....an invisible judge. Exactly who judges the coherancy - it's no one, apparently. It's 'just' coherant (or not). Maybe it was a quickly written blog thing, but that seems to miss some basic ground work (or atleast by the method I use).

Probably more on topic, it seems like either it comes out as a treatise or otherwise you're just a dabbler. But I guess...

--- Quote ---as if the work has given us the secret handshake for our geeky philosophers’ club.
--- End quote ---
Pretty much makes that explicit - no, you're not in our special club unless you write it up in our language, which isn't for the filthy masses. Write one of our treatise or you're a dabbler!

It depends though - Scott's said he's seen manga who's philosophy make him wince. To me the quoted passage seems unexplored (maybe there's more text that goes with it, that hasn't been quoted?).

So perhaps the responce here is two things being treated as one - a dislike, and a call to speak in the special guild way or you're no guild member.
--- End quote ---

What Came Before:

--- Quote from: lockesnow ---Nice take, I agree with the exact spots you flagged.  I think he's got a point, but it's overwhelmed by his in-group biases and preferences.
--- End quote ---

What Came Before:

--- Quote from: arya ---It's hard not agree with that explanation. Literature simply cannot exist without philosphy context- it will be explained literally and intended approach could be missed.And on the contrary- philospohy won't survive without literature.
--- End quote ---

What Came Before:

--- Quote from: Madness ---Yet it seems about linguistic consensus, neh?

This might be another zeitgeist of conception: we might perceive philosophy - or any individual connotation - as inextricable from literature only because we assume the author had those ideas in mind.

For instance, Bakker's often distanced himself from the occult discrepancy, despite the possible merits of such knowledge.
--- End quote ---

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page