Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Frame of Art: Fictions of Aesthetic Experience, 1750-1815

The Frame of Art: Fictions of Aesthetic Experience, 1750-1815 COMPARATIVE LITERATURE /178 petration” (114). He then illustrates the complexity of the literal by delving into Christian and Confucian traditions, for instance the reconciliation with the erotic in the Song of Songs, as well as Zhu Xi’s promotion of a more literal reading of the Book of Poetr y and his differentiation between love songs and allegories of virtues. Longxi is not content with a mere recounting of ideological interpretations or misinterpretations in Chinese and Western traditions. Rather, by drawing on Umberto Eco’s distinction between the “intention of the text” and the “intention of the reader” (126), Longxi advocates on behalf of the text with a full awareness of the political consequences of extreme misinterpretations such as Zhao Gao’s. “One important lesson we may learn from the long history of farfetched and distorted interpretations,” he writes, “is how important it is to respect the integrity of the text, the plain and literal sense of the original language, and how we may appreciate a well-crafted piece of writing for its aesthetic value” (153). As he further points out, “what we must guard against is the displacement of literary criticism by moral and political considerations, the forced reading of a http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Comparative Literature Duke University Press

The Frame of Art: Fictions of Aesthetic Experience, 1750-1815

Comparative Literature , Volume 59 (2) – Jan 1, 2007

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/the-frame-of-art-fictions-of-aesthetic-experience-1750-1815-VOj7cQoKRK

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2007 by University of Oregon
ISSN
0010-4124
eISSN
1945-8517
DOI
10.1215/-59-2-183
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

COMPARATIVE LITERATURE /178 petration” (114). He then illustrates the complexity of the literal by delving into Christian and Confucian traditions, for instance the reconciliation with the erotic in the Song of Songs, as well as Zhu Xi’s promotion of a more literal reading of the Book of Poetr y and his differentiation between love songs and allegories of virtues. Longxi is not content with a mere recounting of ideological interpretations or misinterpretations in Chinese and Western traditions. Rather, by drawing on Umberto Eco’s distinction between the “intention of the text” and the “intention of the reader” (126), Longxi advocates on behalf of the text with a full awareness of the political consequences of extreme misinterpretations such as Zhao Gao’s. “One important lesson we may learn from the long history of farfetched and distorted interpretations,” he writes, “is how important it is to respect the integrity of the text, the plain and literal sense of the original language, and how we may appreciate a well-crafted piece of writing for its aesthetic value” (153). As he further points out, “what we must guard against is the displacement of literary criticism by moral and political considerations, the forced reading of a

Journal

Comparative LiteratureDuke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2007

There are no references for this article.