Eagleton's Complex Definition of Literature
Uploaded by
beevillafloresEagleton's Complex Definition of Literature
Uploaded by
beevillafloresCommon questions
Powered by AIJakobson's concept of 'literariness' emphasizes the self-conscious use of language as a key characteristic of literature. However, according to Eagleton, what qualifies as a 'self-conscious' use of language is highly subjective and can vary greatly among individuals and cultures. This subjectivity complicates the definition of literature because it makes it difficult to establish clear and universally applicable criteria for what constitutes literature .
Eagleton uses the example of Shakespeare versus popular fiction to illustrate how certain texts are traditionally categorized as literature due to cultural and historical biases rather than inherent qualities. While Shakespeare's works are universally recognized as literature, they employ techniques found in popular fiction, such as narrative and metaphor. This example highlights how cultural valorization and canonization drive the distinction between high and low literature, revealing that what is deemed 'literary' is often contingent on external factors rather than intrinsic characteristics .
Eagleton challenges the idea that literature can be defined purely by form and stylistic features by highlighting that many non-literary texts also employ similar forms and styles. Philosophical writings and scientific essays, for example, utilize narrative techniques and metaphors typically associated with literature. Thus, relying strictly on form or style to define literature becomes problematic, as it fails to account for the subjective nature of 'literariness' and can lead to the exclusion or inclusion of texts inconsistently .
According to Eagleton, the literary canon is shaped by the values and ideals of specific historical and cultural contexts, which determine what is considered worthy of study and preservation. As these contexts evolve, so too does the canon, reflecting changes in societal priorities and interests. This means what is considered canonical literature at one time may not hold the same status in another period, highlighting the fluid nature of the literary canon and its dependency on external factors .
The notion of literature as a construct serving ideological purposes challenges conventional literary theories by suggesting that literature is not neutral or inherently valuable but is instead shaped by and reinforces or challenges societal norms and ideologies. This perspective implies that the recognition and valuation of literature are influenced by power dynamics and cultural politics. Conventional theories that focus solely on aesthetic and formal qualities might overlook how literature functions as a tool for ideological expression, revealing the complex interplay between literature and society .
Eagleton identifies the challenge that cultural contexts are not static; they vary greatly between societies and change over time, rendering any single culture-based definition of literature unstable and limited. This variability makes it difficult to establish a universally applicable understanding of literature, as what may be considered valuable and literary in one culture or era may not hold the same status in another. Consequently, literary texts might be interpreted differently depending on the cultural lens applied, which influences how they are perceived and understood in various contexts .
The fluidity in literature's definition, as discussed by Eagleton, implies that literary criticism also needs to be adaptable and open to various interpretations and criteria. Critics must navigate the subjective and changing standards of 'literariness,' which requires a flexible approach that can accommodate diverse perspectives and cultural contexts. This fluidity allows criticism to be more inclusive and dynamic but also poses the challenge of lacking definitive standards, thereby making the evaluative aspect of criticism more complex and situated .
Educational institutions play a significant role in shaping the definition and perception of literature by determining which texts are taught and studied. This institutional authority can reinforce certain texts as 'literature' while excluding others, reflecting the cultural and ideological values of the time. Therefore, what is recognized as literature within academic settings is not merely a matter of a text's intrinsic qualities but also involves power dynamics and institutional decisions, making the definition of literature socially constructed and subject to change .
The significance of postmodern and deconstructionist perspectives lies in their challenge to the fixed and stable meanings traditionally associated with literature. These perspectives emphasize the instability and fluidity of meaning, questioning the very foundation of defining literature. By doing so, they highlight the ideological functions of literature, suggesting that literature not only reflects but can also challenge societal norms and beliefs. Eagleton uses these perspectives to illustrate that literature is not a static category but is continually being constructed and deconstructed in response to changing ideological and cultural forces .
Eagleton argues that value-based definitions, which rely on aesthetic or cultural value, are inadequate because these values are inherently subjective and fluctuate over time and across cultures. Aesthetic value, for instance, depends on individual taste and cultural norms, while cultural value reflects the perspectives of society or institutions, which can change with historical shifts. This instability undermines attempts to use value-based criteria as a definitive measure of what constitutes literature .