Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
World literature as a hermeneutic utopia and a scholarly reality
https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2020-2-27-43
Abstract
In its interpretation of the opposition ‘national literature – world literature’ as defined by Goethe in 1827 the article relies on the dialectic of the hermeneutic circle, related to Goethe’s idea in the general context of the Classical-Romantic utopia of aesthetic humanism. Analyzing Goethe’s statements about world literature, one finds that his tentative concept did not suggest universal surrender of national-specific differences, but rather integration of national literatures (with all of their unique features) as relatively autonomous but mutually conditioned elements of a single literary communication supersystem. According to Goethe, each national literature established itself by involvement in the developing existence of a whole, without losing its identity to an amorphous composite of literatures. By fully preserving its individuality, it in fact joined in a special polyphonic order: a unity of diversity and interpenetration. Goethe, therefore, laid the foundations of a new philological discourse, which gave rise to comparative literary studies as a new scholarly discipline.
About the Author
A. I. Zherebin
Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksey I. Zherebin – Doctor of Philology
48 Reki Moiki Emb., St. Petersburg, 191186
References
1. Assmann, A. (2015). Im Dickicht der Zeichen. Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag. (In German).
2. Auerbach, E. (1967). Philologie der Weltliteratur. In: F. Schalk and G. Konrad, eds., Gesammelte Aufsätze zur romanischen Philologiе von E. Auerbach. Bern; München: Francke, pp. 301-310. (In German).
3. Bocharov, S. (2012). On literature’s blood vascular system and its genetic memory. In: S. Bocharov, The genetic memory of literature. Moscow: Rossiysky Gosudarstvenny Gumanitarny Universitet, pp. 7-44. (In Russ.)
4. Borges, J. L. (1997). The library of Babel. Translated by B. Dubin. In: B. Dubin, ed., The collected works of J. L. Borges (3 vols). Vol. 1. Moscow: Polyaris, pp. 341-348. (In Russ.)
5. Bourdieu, P. (2000). The literary field. Translated by M. Gronas. Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie, 5, pp. 22-87. (In Russ.)
6. Eckermann, J. P. (1982). Gespräche mit Goethe in den Letzten Jahren seines Lebens. Berlin, Weimar: Aufbau Verlag. (In German).
7. Foucault, M. (1994). Qu’est-ce qu’un auteur? In: D. Defert, F. Ewald and J.Lagrande, eds., Dits et écrits par M. Foucault 1954-1969. Paris: Gallimard, pp. 789-821. (In French).
8. Frank, S. (1926). Die russische Weltanschauung. Charlottenburg: Pan-Verlag. (In German).
9. Gadamer, H.-G. (1986). Vom Zirkel des Verstehens. In: H. G. Gadamer, Gesammelte Werke (6 Bände). Bd. 2. Tübingen: Mohr, pp. 57-65. (In German).
10. Goethe, J. W. (1901-1908a). German Romance. Edinburgh 1827. In: Heinemann, ed., Werke von J. W. Goethe von 30 Bände. Bd. 26: Theater und Literatur. Leipzig, Wien: Bibliographisches Institut, pp. 238-239. (In German).
11. Goethe, J. W. (1901-1908b). The Life of Friedrich Schiller. Comprehending an examination of his works. London 1825. In: K. Heinemann, ed., Werke von J. W. Goethe von 30 Bände. Bd. 26: Theater und Literatur. Leipzig, Wien: Bibliographisches Institut, pp. 239-240. (In German).
12. Kemper, D. (2007). Nationale Differenz vor der Ausdifferenzierung nationaler Literaturwissenschaften: Goethes Konzept der Weltliteratur als ‘res publica litteraria’ der Moderne. Russkaya Germanistika. Ezhegodnik Rossiyskogo Soyuza Germanistov, 3, pp. 20-41. (In German).
13. Lamping, D. (2010). Die Idee der Weltliteratur. Ein Konzept Goethes und seine Karriere. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner. (In German).
14. Lotman, Y. (1992). On the semiosphere. In: Y. Lotman, Selected articles (3 vols). Vol. 1. Tallinn: Alexandra, pp. 11-24. (In Russ.)
15. Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1955). Manifesto of the Communist Party. Translated by Marx – Engels – Lenin Institute. In: О. Senekina, ed., Works of K. Marx and F. Engels (30 vols). Vol. 4. Moscow: Gospolitizdat, pp. 419-459. (In Russ.)
16. Moretti, F. (2016). Distant reading. Translated by A. Vdovin, O. Sobchuk and Sheli. Moscow: Institut Gaydara. (In Russ.)
17. Novalis. (1907). Fragmente vermischten Inhalts. In: J. Minor, ed., Schriften von Novalis (4 Bände). Bd. 2. Jena: Diederichs Verlag, pp. 189-315. (In German).
18. Rasch, W. (1967). Aspekte der deutschen Literatur um 1900. In: W. Rasch, Zur deutschen Literatur seit der Jahrhundertwende. Gesammelte Aufsätze. Stuttgart: Metzler, pp. 1-48. (In German).
19. Reder, M. and Schmidt, J., eds. (2008). Ein Bewußtsein von dem, was fehlt. Eine Diskussion mit Jürgen Habermas. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp. (In German).
20. Riemer, F. W. (1921). Mitteilungen über Goethe. Leipzig: Insel Verlag. (In German).
21. Schlegel, F. (1980). Lucinde. In: W. Hecht, ed., Werke von F. Schlegel (2 Bände). Bd. 2. Berlin, Weimar: Aufbau Verlag, pp. 9-99. (In German).
22. Schleiermacher, F. D. E. (1993). Hermeneutik und Kritik. Frankfurt M.: Suhrkamp. (In German).
23. Schopenhauer, A. (1919). Über das metaphysiche Bedürfnis des Menschen. In: J. Frauenstädt, ed., Sämtliche Werke von A. Schopenhauer (6 Bände). Bd. 2. Leipzig: Brockhaus, pp. 175-209. (In German).
24. Shaytanov, I. (2018). ‘World literature’ as a problem and a challenge. Voprosy Literatury, 6, pp. 13-33. (In Russ.)
25. Szilard, L. (2002). Russian hermeneutics in the 20th c. In: L. Szilard, Hermetecism and hermeneutics. St. Petersburg: Izd. Ivana Limbakha, pp. 13-26. (In Russ.)
26. Tyupa, V. (2010). ‘Dialogue of agreement’ as Mikhail Bakhtin’s neo-rhetoric project. In: V. Tyupa, Discursive formations. Essays on comparative rhetoric. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury, pp. 294-306. (In Russ.)
27. Veselovsky, A. (1999). On the Romano-Germanic society in St. Petersburg and its possible goals. In: P. Zaborov, ed., The selected works and letters of A. Veselovsky. St. Petersburg: Nauka, pp. 125-134. (In Russ.)
28. Wittgenstein, L. (1994). Logical-philosophical treatise. Translated by M. Kozlova and Y. Aseev. In: M. Kozlova, ed., Philosophical works by L. Wittgenstein. Part 1. Moscow: Gnozis, pp. 5-73. (In Russ.)
29. Zhirmunsky, V. (1979a). A. N. Veselovsky and comparative literature. In: V. Zhirmunsky, Comparative literature. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 84-156. (In Russ.)
30. Zhirmunsky, V. (1979b). Literary trends as an international phenomenon. In: V. Zhirmunsky, Comparative literature. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 137-157. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Zherebin A.I. World literature as a hermeneutic utopia and a scholarly reality. Voprosy literatury. 2020;(2):27-43. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2020-2-27-43
Views:
362
Email this article 
