LITERATURE – ANGLES – VIEWS
PGS.TS.NGUT. Truong Dinh
University of Education, Hue University
This article has a goodwill to find from recent decades the angles, perspectives, and approaches to literature in a tireless journey, from literature in general and literature in schools in particular. . The writer has collected and selected to introduce the theoretical approaches of famous scientists and teachers, at home and abroad, with depth of thought, a general and expressive style. feel, update modern issues in the research and teaching of current literature.
You are viewing: What is literature?
1. What is literature?
The theory of literary reception must start from the awareness of the aesthetic object which is the literary work. The work of literature is such a complex phenomenon that some consider it a mere fantasy.
There are hundreds of definitions of literature, all of which are correct but incomplete in discovering the nature of literature.
It is said that an image is specific and emotional, but in fact it is a very vague and non-specific object. Using the concretized concept of literary reception, one finds that literature cannot be a tangible, immutable product, a definite object. On the other hand, the literary work, compared with the reception of the text in general, is a particular transformation of the object into the subject and of the subject into the object (Vonkova EB). Since the object and the subject are always changing, how can the content of the work be determined? So what is the actual location of the work?
Levis Strauss replied: it is impossible to answer, only the appearance of it is authentic. Some scientists consider the work to be a contradictory original being: it is closed versus open, it is the struggle of creative language and worn language (J.Vigner), it is a complex of dialectical relations such as reason and feeling, taste and reflection, intuition and generalization, stability and change, closure and openness, identity and distance, temporality and long, part and whole, content and form, synchronicity and chronology, etc. And one concludes that it is impossible to communicate with such an illusory object. Communicating with literature is demeaning it because it is a product of instantaneous inspiration generated disinterestedly with any receptivity.
Literary work is an intransitive verb (R. Barthes). If literature is considered as the transmission of personal experience, personal experience can never communicate in its entirety (A. Martinet). It seems that in all forms of communication, literary communication is not solid: lacking a direct speaker, the communicator is often not strong enough to experience to share, when in life there has never been a conflict. agree on how to look, how to think, how to feel with life?
The complexity of the literary object was tirelessly sought by researchers to define, until, in recent decades, in the most recent international conference on the theory of teaching literature and language, Dubrovski had to conclude Comment: “Let us be content that we have chosen one great question to many questions about the nature of literature, one that is certain to never be answered correctly and completely and that is already done!”
Yet in the world, for hundreds of years, people still teach ancient literature like the ancient appearance of schools. While teaching, people keep doubting: Why teach literature? Can literature be taught? Teaching literature is teaching what? How to teach literature? And what is the most painful thing to teach literature for? (Pourquoi enseigner la littérature?) The whole world is searching, is it helpless – the nature of literature and its reception?
When it comes to the nature of literature, one must not forget to mention its polysemy due to its ambiguous character: Polysemanticity is always associated with literary character. Polysemy is associated with the reception as a game, it is created by the player.
Literature is the introspection of language (R. Barthes), the synchronicity of the text (Bennamon), the polyphony of the text (Bakhtine), the open door (Eco), the plural (pluralité). .
2. Objectives of teaching literature
Anyway, for hundreds of years, people still teach Literature in schools. Due to the complexity of the teaching object, leading to the dispersion of the goal of teaching Literature. Teaching – learning Literature is to understand? Is to learn how to live? is to enjoy? Or to create literature? Like the nature of literature, the question of the goal of teaching Literature is also a generative question: a question that generates many follow-up questions (Todorov). After all, the goal of teaching Literature depends on the circumstances of the country’s school (Up to now, the question about the goal of teaching Literature in our country is still very vague). An important concept about the goal of literature is to bring joy (le plaisir) (The time of literature in our country brings boredom).
Roland Barthes distinguishes ordinary pleasure from hedonistic pleasure. He also considered the relationship with poetry as a love relationship. The person who reads and studies literature must be like a lover. He considered the joy of reading and studying literature as the satisfaction of a desire. R. Barthes asserts that literary pleasure is not only physiological and emotional joy but also intellectual joy. Pennac unifies three verbs when reading literature: read – love – dream. Since the early 1980s, researchers in teaching Literature in Vietnam have paid special attention to the effectiveness of an hour of Literature teaching and came to the conclusion that it is a composite effect of Truthfulness-Compassion-Americanism. of the time of Literature, in which America must be important because beauty always contains the right and the good. It is an effect that is developed at each school age and must take into account that there is a criterion to investigate the quality, from the quality of teaching literary works and teaching Literature and history on the basis of distinguishing between literature and literature. study (nowadays we often use literature and literature together!).
3. Dialectical categories
3.1. Emotions and reason in receiving literature
The relationship between emotion and reason in teaching literature tends to be left to go to extreme phenomena: either in favor of inspirational lessons or logic lessons. It should be clearly recognized that: inspiration is an urgent requirement of Literature class and is also the cause of interesting Literature hour which is stimulated by aesthetic emotions. Need to be properly aware of the inspirational in Literature class, do not consider it as a spice. To deprive literature of inspiration is to deprive literature of its unique energy. Although students are considered the subject of the lesson, the teacher’s teaching is an inspirational element that needs attention, it should not be considered as a spice or an ornament for the lesson, but must give it a special taste. proper mind. But what concept is inspirational? Inspiration is only effective when it instills a belief in authenticity. The greatest inspiration is the one that reaches the realism, and the greatest truth is the authenticity that reaches the inspirational level, the culmination of the Literature hour, where these two important currents converge (Do Kim Hoi ).
Talking about the relationship between emotions and reason in teaching Literature, there has long been a tradition of combining intuition (expressive reading) and rational perception (analysis). That combination can take place at the beginning of the lesson, during and outside of school hours, helping students throughout the lesson to be active in thinking and feeling. However, the intuitive stitching seems to have received little attention. Professor Le Tri Vien deals with the relationship between emotions and reason vertically. He divided the path from the origin of the article to the stage of perception through 3 stages: reason 1 (origin) → intuition → reason 2 (summary).
3.2. Literature and Language in receiving literature
Quality Language in teaching Literature is considered as a combination of factors: linguistic knowledge, sentiment of teachers and students, teacher’s teaching as a metalanguage (language analysis). The quality of Literature is in the quality of Language and vice versa. It is necessary to avoid turning the essay into a Vietnamese lesson and also teaching the language of escapism (Vo Xuan Trang).
The combination of Language and Literature has been handled quite appropriately in the Literature textbook for a few years and applied in the instruction manual for teaching Literature according to the integrated design from grade 6 to grade 11 (Truong Dinh) according to the model. Textbook from primary to secondary school of Textbook.
The integrated model of Language and Literature has been established as follows about the relationship between Language and Literature:
Through the integration of Language and Literature according to the above model, the capacity to learn Literature is the ability to READ – LISTEN – SPEAK – WRITE (Truong Dinh).
See more: Guide to buy Mobifone 0904 What is the network?
3.3. Literature and technology in the reception of literature
Is teaching Literature a technique? Maybe technology, transferable or not? Every profession has its own know-how and a unique system for learning and passing on the profession. Those who don’t learn a job and don’t know technical skills will not be able to do that job. If you already know the profession, you must strive to be skilled. Teaching is a profession, a serious profession, a noble profession that has been honored throughout the history of mankind: “Technology of teaching methods of Literature is understood as a technique of analyzing texts, analyzing competence. students, design techniques by work and manipulation, techniques for building reading comprehension processes for students, organizing for students to construct designs. Everything can be transferred, which we have not been able to do for a long time due to the lack of summarizing and generalizing experience (Truong Dinh)…”. It is necessary to understand the concept of “technology” in such teaching, rather than abusing information technology like today, leading to extra hours in Literature teaching hours, watching movies or watching video clips, only interested in colors and images. , forget the movement of thinking and emotions to analyze the text.
4. Modern approaches
4.1. Approach from receptive theory
In recent years, receptive theory has penetrated into the study, composition and teaching of literature, along with integration theory. From the last year of the 80’s, Harald Weinrich at the University of Berlin mentioned: There should be a literary history of the literary reader (for a long time we only refer to the history of literary creation). Literary history has long been directed only towards the author, though secretly without paying attention to the reader, just as in school, we only pay attention to the teacher, not to the student. The effectiveness of a work is reflected in the quantity and quality of readers as well as the effectiveness of an hour of Literature. Thus, if there is a history of literary reception (historic littérate) there is also a need for a history of literary reception in the school. There has long been a linguistic study of listeners, readers, and receivers, which has achieved remarkable achievements. Many scientists have distinguished the reader and the public (Dieckhmann), the reader for whom (à qui), the reader for whom (pourquoi) (Escarpit), the reader and the architect (Riffatterie). Aristotle’s poetics considered French literature as “the aesthetics of representation” (of the reader. TD), the aesthetics of effects (in the reader. TD) (esthétique de l’effet). Tragedy arises not from genre structure and style, but from effectiveness: inciting fear and love in the audience and readers. Ancient rhetoric was concerned with the public, the general public wanted the orator first of all to make the audience attentive (docilemfacere) and kind (benevolem).
Thus, now Van must consider students not only as readers but also as recipients. Under the aesthetic impact of the work, “students follow and participate in the writer’s creative goals, realize the writer’s artistic intentions through consonance, and multiply emotions through the movement of emotions. The soul is a new understanding of life” (Nguyen Trong Hoan). Students are not only recipients of literature in Literature textbooks but also literature in real life to enrich their souls and minds. Unfortunately, at present, students do not read – feel but only listen to lectures and take notes during Literature class. Reception theory needs to pay attention to the “receptive range” and “aesthetic distance” of students when receiving literature.
4.2. Theory of approaching problem words
The theory of teaching students to raise problems comes from the point of view of artistic contradictions of LXVùgotsky. “Problems arise in literary works from artistic contradictions”.
Krapchenko writes: “The basis of a work’s structure is the conflict in its artistic expression.” According to him, “the conflicting development determines the internal structure of the work”. Krapchenko identifies artistic contradictions at the semantic level. Vygotsky identified the artistic contradiction at the aesthetic level. Conflict is expressed by the concept of “opposite emotions”. It is related to “catharsis” as a purification of the reader’s soul after the opposing emotions in the perception are destroyed.
Teaching problem-solving aims to exploit artistic contradictions in multi-meaningful signals. According to the structure of the work, it must form a spiral development going from partial perception to total perception.
Teaching problem-solving creates dialogue lessons.
However, it should be noted: these classes easily lead to rational Literature classes. Defining the problem and problem system through questions must aim at the students’ acceptance and aesthetic distance to the work.
4.3. Approach from synchronization theory
For the first time, since the 70s, the late Professor Nguyen Dac Nam distinguished between the concepts of literature and literature, which until now are still used interchangeably in textbooks. He also proposed a systematic approach: history → arising through the history of the textual system → to functional history, that is, the process from the birth of the work, through the analysis of the text. Analysis of the work leads to the education of ideology and morality through teaching literature.
The synchronous approach was also emphasized by the late Professor Phan Trong Luan in a workshop.
5. Literature teaching lesson plan
A very normal job of a teacher from apprenticeship to practice is a lesson plan for teaching Literature. It should be deeply recognized that it is the assimilation of the teacher’s general knowledge.
The lesson plan for teaching Literature is the synthesis of knowledge and methods, the attachment between content and methods, the synchronous and harmonious application with consideration to carefully select the impact of the soul and ability. profound breakthrough between the unique value of the work and the teaching strategy. The curriculum is like that. Its normative necessity is the starting point for the contemplation of methodological innovation. Let’s intensively cultivate this barren land to make fruit” (Nguyen Thanh Hung).
See also: What is Human Resources – Handbook for applying for a job in the Human Resources Industry
On the basis of approaching modern theories in recent years, the preparation of Literature textbooks and the problem of teaching methods of Literature have had some innovations, which have certain effects on the quality of Literature teaching in high schools. However, the quality of teaching and learning Literature today is still poor, and even the subject of Literature is boring to students. In the coming years, with the fundamental and comprehensive renovation of the Literature curriculum and textbook, it is hoped that Literature class will bring interest to students.