scholarly journals American Indian epistemology in Deborah A. Miranda’s 'Bad Indians: A Tribal Memoir'

Author(s):  
Grzegorz Welizarowicz

The essay proposes that Deborah A. Miranda’s Bad Indians: A Tribal Memoir (2013) is a work animated by the principles of American Indian epistemology. First, a model of Native philosophy is outlined after Native philosopher Thomas Norton-Smith. Secondly, four dimensions of Miranda’s work – its ethical and procedural purpose, generic location, metalinguistic strategy, narrative as a vehicle of knowledge – are analyzed in the light of Norton-Smith, Roland Barthes, California historians, American Indian literary studies, decolonial theory, and auto-ethnography. In conclusion, it is posited that Miranda’s story is an animated entity enacting ontological, intersubjective, historical difference, and that it intervenes into the genre of memoir/autobiography.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kostiantyn Yanchenko

Narrative analysis represents the cutting edge in various domains of political communication research and has recently made its way into populism studies. Nevertheless, despite the growing academic interest in populist storytelling and populist narratives, a conceptual foundation of these phenomena remains scarce. Situated at the intersection of political communication and literary studies, the article fills this gap by proposing a systematized concept of a populist narrative. Building upon the minimum definitions of the background concepts, the study identifies a set of necessary attributes shared by populist narratives. It further discusses the effectiveness of populist narratives with the focus on four dimensions: archetypal structure, emotionality, suspensefulness, and ability to facilitate identification. Against the backdrop of the increasing role of storytelling in contemporary politics, the article facilitates a more coherent and meaningful examination of populist narratives.


2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-210
Author(s):  
Katerina Kroucheva

Abstract This article concerns itself with Gérard Genette’s reception in Germanophone literary study. Through an analysis of the rhetorical substrate from which Genette’s terminology draws its specific tension, the article determines that Genette is not only an excessive systematist, but also and simultaneously an author who battles received attempts at order and who foregrounds doubts about the idea of order. In this way, he displays a kinship with such theorists as Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida. The receptions of the rhetorical construction of Genette’s texts and of the particular strategies of structuralism to which that construction refers did not occur synchronously in French, American, Russian, and German literary studies. The article demonstrates that, while German literary theory occasionally discusses Genette’s positioning within the field, there remains a general absence of the recognition that practically all of his books display a definite proximity to deconstruction, and that this proximity plays a central role in Genette’s enire theoretical edifice. This text is, last but not least, a call to read literary-theoretical texts in their aesthetic contexts.


Populism ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-220
Author(s):  
Kostiantyn Yanchenko

Abstract Narrative analysis represents the cutting edge in various domains of political communication research and has recently made its way into populism studies. Nevertheless, despite the growing academic interest in populist storytelling and populist narratives, a conceptual foundation of these phenomena remains scarce. Situated at the intersection of political communication and literary studies, the article fills this gap by proposing a systematized concept of a populist narrative. Building upon the minimum definitions of the background concepts, the study identifies a set of necessary attributes shared by populist narratives. It further discusses the effectiveness of populist narratives with the focus on four dimensions: archetypal structure, emotionality, suspensefulness, and ability to facilitate identification. Against the backdrop of the increasing role of storytelling in contemporary politics, the article facilitates a more coherent and meaningful examination of populist narratives.


2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 534-540
Author(s):  
Sarah Beckwith

As an Afterword to the Special Issue on “The Sacramental Text Reconsidered,” this essay consolidates approaches to sacramentality in literary studies in four dimensions, and these dimensions are symptomatic of the wider sub-field and the larger context of literary studies at present. Those four ways are: the sacrament as a historical trajectory; the sacrament as concept, and also the vehicle of conceptual amnesia; the sacrament as language; the sacrament as literature.


Author(s):  
James Risser

In the field of contemporary literary studies, the French essayist and cultural critic Roland Barthes cannot be easily classified. His early work on language and culture was strongly influenced by the intellectual currents of existentialism and Marxism that were dominant in French intellectual life in the mid-twentieth century. Gradually his work turned more to semiology (a general theory of signs), which had a close association with the structuralist tradition in literary criticism. In his later work, Barthes wrote more as a post-structuralist than as a structuralist in an attempt to define the nature and authority of a text. Throughout his writings Barthes rejected the ‘naturalist’ view of language, which takes the sign as a representation of reality. He maintained that language is a dynamic activity that dramatically affects literary and cultural practices.


PMLA ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 125 (4) ◽  
pp. 977-993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ottmar Ette

In 2001, the official year of the “life sciences” in germany, ottmar ette began pulling together ideas for what was to become the programmatic essay excerpted and translated here. Ette is known for different things in different places: in Spain and Hispanic America, he is renowned for his work on José Martí, Jorge Semprún, Mario Vargas Llosa, Gabriel García Márquez, and a host of other authors. In the francophone world, he is best known for his writings on Roland Barthes and, more recently, on Amin Maalouf, while his reputation in his native Germany rests on his voluminous work on Alexander von Humboldt and on the new literatures in German. That this polyglot professor of Romance literatures is, at heart and in practice, a comparatist goes almost without saying. He is also, perhaps as inevitably, a literary theorist and a cultural critic, whose work has attracted attention throughout Europe. In his 2004 book ÜberLebenswissen—a title that might be rendered in English both as “Knowledge for Survival” and as “About Life Knowledge”—Ette first began to reclaim for literary studies the dual concepts of Lebenswissen and Lebenswissenschaft, which I have translated provisionally as “knowledge for living” and “science for living” to set them off from the biotechnological discourses of the life sciences. While ÜberLebenswissen focuses on the disciplinary history and practices of the field of Romance literatures, its companion volume from 2005, ZwischenWeltenSchreiben: Literaturen ohne festen Wohnsitz (“Writing between Worlds: Literatures without a Fixed Abode”), extends Ette's inquiry to the global contexts of Shoah, Cuban, and Arab American literatures. Both volumes urge that literary studies “be opened up, made accessible and relevant, to the larger society. Doing so is, simply and plainly, a matter of survival” (ZwischenWeltenSchreiben 270).


2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ikwan Setiawan

This article deals with Roland Barthes’ mythological thinking and its methodological implication in literary studies. Its basic thinking is that in various modes of representation exist the dynamics of mythical signification using denotative signification as its basic and aims to address particular message to readers or viewers. Such signification intertwines with the complexity of discourses, histories, knowledge, and problems in the real life. Its final goal is to depoliticize and ex-nominates making something nameless dominant political interest in narrative naturally. Barthes also conceptualizes an idea on second myth that uses (the first) myth as its basis of signifying process to subvert the dominant class’ political interest. For explaining the contributions of these two mythological perspectives in literary studies, I give conceptualize method of analysis using both of them. As concluding remarks, I position Barthes’ mythological thinking as a theoretical framework which can avoid literary studies from over intervention of outside-literary factors political economy, general theories, etc. that make the studies seem losing their narrative base. Because Barthes’ perspective emphasizes on reading of narrative dynamics without negating exploration of discursive richness in signifying process, naturalization of ideological discourses, and ex-nomination of particular political interest.AbstrakTulisan ini membahas pemikiran mitologis Roland Barthes serta implikasi metodologisnya dalam kajian sastra. Inti dari pemikirannya adalah bahwa dalam beragam moda representasi berlangsung dinamika penandaan mitis yang menggunakan penandaan denotatif sebagai basisnya dan bertujuan menyampaikan pesan tertentu kepada pembaca ataupun penonton. Penandaan tersebut berjalin-kelindan dengan kompleksitas wacana, sejarah, pengetahuan, dan permasalahan dalam kehidupan nyata. Tujuan akhirnya adalah untuk mendepolitisasi dan mengeksnominasi menjadikan sesuatu tak bernama kepentingan politik dominan dalam narasi secara alamiah. Barthes juga mengkonseptualisasikan gagasan tentang mitos kedua yang menggunakan mitos (pertama) sebagai basis proses penandaan untuk mensubversi kepentingan politik kelas dominan. Untuk menjelaskan implikasi metodologis kedua perspektif mitologis tersebut dalam kajian sastra, saya mengkonseptuliasikan metode analisis dengan menggunakan keduanya. Sebagai simpulan, saya memosisikan pemikiran mitologis Barthes sebagai kerangka teoretis yang bisa menghindarkan kajian sastra dari intervensi berlebihan dari faktor-faktor di luar sastra faktor ekonomi-politik, teori-teori umum, dan lain-lain yang menjadikan kajian tersebut tampak kehilangan pijakan naratif. Karena perspektif Barthes menekankan kepada pembacaan dinamika naratif dalam kerangka penandaan tanpa mengabaikan eksplorasi kekayaan diskursif dalam proses penandaan, naturalisasi wacana ideologis, dan eks-nominasi kepentingan politik partikular. 


2000 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandy Marie Anglas Grande

In this article, Sandy Marie Anglás Grande outlines the tensions between American Indian epistemology and critical pedagogy. She asserts that the deep structures of critical pedagogy fail to consider an Indigenous perspective. In arguing that American Indian scholars should reshape and reimagine critical pedagogy, Grande also calls for critical theorists to reexamine their epistemological foundations. Looking through these two lenses of critical theory and Indigenous scholarship, Grande begins to redefine concepts of democracy, identity, and social justice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document