Re: Reading History -- Mimetic Theory and Literary Study

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09:17:00 01/29/08 Tue
Author: Janelle
Subject: Re: Reading History
In reply to: Erin Risch 's message, "Reading History" on 06:29:56 01/28/08 Mon

I agree with your point Erin. I also made the connection between the levels of reading Dr. Jackson talked about and how Girard or anyone should read de Machaut. I think the difference you point out between how we are cautious of historical writers and how we trust literary narrators is a good and interesting point to address. I think perhaps it has something to do with the nature of the genre. When we read a historical text we understand the narrator's perception to be different from our own because of the difference in place and time. We understand history to be a collection fo facts and events that, as we learn more and more about them, are, through time, revised and changed. I think this is why our reading of literature differs from our reading of history. In a novel, it does not necessarily occur to the reader that what is about to be presented to them is to be interepeted in the same way. The reader sees it as a story, not history, which is viewed with hindisght, which may lead to initial trust in a narrator.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Reading History -- Caitlin, 13:19:09 01/29/08 Tue