A Comparative Study of Analytic and Continental Philosophy of Literature, With an Apology for Analytic Philosophy of Literature

Author
Mohammad Ghaffary
Arak University, Arak 38156-8-8349, Iran, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Department of English
Abstract
Although since classical times philosophical reflections on the nature and functions of literature have not been uncommon, the “philosophy of literature,” as a separate discipline or field, is a new phenomenon. The two approaches distinguished in Western philosophy since about a century ago, i.e., analytic vs. Continental philosophy, can be observed in philosophy of literature as well. Adopting a comparative method, this essay first examines the differences between analytic and Continental philosophy and, then, those between analytic and Continental philosophy of literature. The focus of this essay is on the analytic philosophy of literature since it seems this kind of philosophy, with its logical and realist method of conceptual analysis, can help us better in understanding the nature and functions of literature. The basic claim of this essay, then, is that Continental philosophy of literature is itself another manifestation of literature and only increases the ambiguity and mystification of the concept of literature. In order to give meaning to life and consequently to literature, Continental philosophers, like literary creators, have recourse to “metaphysical or logocentric metaphors” and “philosophical fictions.” However, the products of these attempts almost have the same functions and effects as those of literature. Of course, this is not to deny the value of the Continental approach; rather, as discussed at the end of the essay, in my view, what we need more in the current critical situation in Iran is analytic philosophy of literature rather than Continental philosophy of literature, because by concentrating on the analysis of the concept of literature and other related concepts the analytic approach prepares the ground for acquiring a more precise understanding of this field, and it is only then that we can adopt the Continental method for exploring the other aspects of literature.

Keywords

Subjects

- خراسانی (شرف)، شرف‌الدین (1393). از سقراط تا ارسطو. چ3. تهران: مرکز چاپ و انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
- زرین‌کوب، عبدالحسین (1388). شعر بی‌دروغ، شعر بی‌نقاب: بحث در فنون شاعری، سبک، و نقد شعر فارسی با ملاحظات تطبیقی و انتقادی راجع‌به شعر قدیم و امروز. چ10. تهران: علمی.
- سارتر، ژان پل (1388). ادبیات چیست؟. ترجمۀ ابوالحسن نجفی و مصطفی رحیمی. چ8. تهران: نیلوفر.
- عزب‌دفتری، بهروز (1369). «پیش‌گفتار چاپ اول» در ادبیات و بازتاب آن. ویلیام جِی گِرِیس. ترجمۀ بهروز عزب‌دفتری. و2. تبریز: نیما. صص50-11.
- کریچلی، سایمون (1387). فلسفۀ قاره‌ای. ترجمۀ خشایار دیهیمی. تهران: ماهی.
- موحد، ضیاء (1390). «چرا شعر؟» در آوازهای آبی: گزیدۀ شعرها. ترجمه به انگلیسی: سعید سعیدپور. تهران: هرمس. صص1-6.
- Azab-Daftari, B. (1990). "Pishgoftār-e Chāp-e Aval" in William J. Grace. Adabiyāt va Bāztāb-e Ān. B. Azab-Daftari (Trans.). 2nd Ed. Tabriz: Nima. pp. 11-50. [in Persian]
- Bloom, H. (1995). The Western Canon: The Books and Schools of the Ages. New York: Riverhead Books.
- Carroll, N. (2002). Philosophy of Art: A Contemporary Introduction. London & New York: Routledge.
- Colebrook, C. (2002). Gilles Deleuze. London & New York: Routledge.
- __________ (2004). "Literature" in Understanding Derrida. J. Reynolds & J. Roffe (Eds.). New York & London: Continuum. pp. 75-83.
- Critchley, S. (2008). Falsafeh-ye Qārreh-yi. Kh. Deihimi (Trans.). Tehran: Mahi. [in Persian]
- Deleuze, G. & F. Guattari (1994). What Is Philosophy? H. Tomlinson & G. Burchill (Trans.). London & New York: Verso.
- Eagleton, T. (2008). Literary Theory: An Introduction. Anniversary Edition (3rd Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
- Hagberg, G.L. & W. Jost (Eds.) (2010). A Companion to the Philosophy of Literature. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
- Hughes, J. (2009). Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition: A Reader’s Guide. London & New York: Continuum.
- John, E. & D. McIver Lopes (Eds.) (2004). Philosophy of Literature, Contemporary and Classic Readings: An Anthology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
- Khattate, N. (2007). "La Critique au XXe siècle" in J. Kahnamouipour & N. Khattate. La Critique littéraire. Tehran: SAMT. pp. 71-223. [in Persian]
- Khorassani (Sharaf), Sh. (2014). Az Soqrāt tā Arastoo. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press. [in Persian]
- Lamarque, P. (2009). The Philosophy of Literature. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
- Lamarque, P. & S.H. Olsen (Eds.) (2004). Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art, The Analytic Tradition: An Anthology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
- McQuillan, M. (2001). Paul de Man. London & New York: Routledge.
- Movahhed, Z. (2011). "Cherā She’r?" in Āvāz-hāye Ābi: Gozideh-ye She’r-hā. Translated into English by S. Sa’eed-Poor. Terhan: Hermes. pp. 1-6. [in Persian]
- Sartre, J. -P. (2009). Adabiyāt Chist?. A. Najafi & M. Rahimi (Trans.). Tehran: Niloofar. [in Persian]
- Wellek, R. & A. Warren (1973). Theory of Literature. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
- Williams, B. (2003). "Contemporary Philosophy: A Second Look" in N. Bunnin & E.P. Tsui-James (Eds.). The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy. 2nd Ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. pp. 23-34.
- Williamson, T. (2005). "Armchair Philosophy, Metaphysical Modality, and Counterfactual Thinking". Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. Vol. 105. No. 1. pp. 1-23.
- Wilson, R. (2007). Theodor Adorno. London & New York: Routledge.
- Zarrin-Koob, A. (2009). She’r-e Bi-Dorooq, She’r-e Bi-Neqāb: Bahs dar Fonoon-e Shā’eri, Sabk, va Naqd-e She’r-e Fārsi bā Molāhezāt-e Tatbiqi va Enteqādi Rāje’ be She’r-e Qadim va Jadid. Tehran: Elmi. [in Persian]
Literary Criticism
Volume 10, Issue 38
Summer 2017
Pages 33-57