Kivy introduces the theme of Chapter 5 at the end of Chapter 4: "I have argued in the chapter 4 that the notion of a form-content fusion, in the literary arts in particular, is symptomatic of a desire to reveal in them some special kind of knowledge that only they can possess and impart: a kind of knowledge immune to the inroads of the specialized scientific, academic, and philosophical disciplines, which cliam exclusive domain over the "knowledge game". My own belief is that literature has been, and continues to be, a conduit for knowledge not unique to itself, but common to the specialized disciplines as well, at least within the limits of its demesne. But this is a highly controversial belief, and stands in need of defense and amplification. That will be my project in the next chapter" (p. 119)
And he identifies that belief in literature as a "conduit of knowledge" with the "Propositional theory" as presented, and then attacked by two contemporary analytic philosphers, Peter Lamarque and Stein Olsen in their book "Truth, Fiction and Literature": "A Propositional Theory of Literary Truth could then be formulated as follows: The literary work contains or implies general thematic statements about the world which the reader, as part of the appreciation of the work, has to assess as true or false" Why is this theory wrong? Because, as Lamarque and Olsen tell us, "debate about the truth or falsity of the propositions implied by literary work is absent from literary criticism since it does not enter into the appreciation of the work as a literary work" (Note: Michael Brady raised a similar issue a few months ago when he declared that "I judged it on artistic (i.e., non-truthful) qualities of drawing, proportion, etc.", and then told us how he first determines :"If it appears to be a representation, is it "truth-dependent" or "truth-independent"?") Kivy deflects that argument by suggesting that critics serve a similar function for literature that musicians serve when they make a written text available to a wider audience for aesthetic appreciation. The literary critic can helpfully explicate thematic statements -- and then leave it up to the reader to assess those propositions as true or false. Neither argument is very effective for me -- since I happily read dozens of books every year without ever opening a book of literary criticism -- and I suspect that I share that inclination with the vast majority of the reading public. Literary criticism is written for other literary critics, or student wanna-be's, within a kind of intellectual ghetto. But at the beginning of the chapter, Kivy confesses that "if at least a modest version of the Propositional Theory cannot be salvaged from Lamarque and Olsen's powerful atttempt at demolition, my own literary experience will be very difficult for me to comprehend. Indeed, part of my "world view", if I may risk being too gradiose, is going to totter" Which is somewhat how I feel about this issue, as well -- since I read fiction for what I hope will be truthful accounts of human experience. Not true in the sense of historical fact -- but true insofar as they are possible. Nothing annoys me more than stories that are obviously trying to push the emotional buttons of a large audience instead of striving for the important truth of a situation. Except that, I'm much less interested in trying to put that truth into various propositions -- so his analogy to scientific practice (the "Laboratory of Fictional Truth"doesn't really work for me. As Kivy sees it, there are many, ongoing "perennial themes" that literature (instead of cheesy soap operas) present to the reader for truth judgment. For example - the conflict between the ideas of free will and determinism. Not that a reader is required to judge one way or the other -- but that the question remains open - as opposed to some other questions -- like the benefits of human slavery -- which are now considered closed. Sound familiar? Isn't this the same kind of "propositional" literature that Ayn Rand was writing and celebrating in the "Romatic Manifesto"? My problem is that the more clearly such propositions appear in any given novel, play, or film -- the less eager I am to read or view them. So maybe I agree with Larmarque and Olsen after all. ____________________________________________________________ Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxRO9qJUjJ8CTUaehsc1vmlkF ztBrOIXXG2zSNrkQ3bvLEhZTbQHy4/
