Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Fractal : Revista de Psicologia |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/article/view/5851 |
Resumo: | The subject-matter of this paper is the process of literary writing, seeking to understand it according to its collective aspect. This theme emerged from the contact with interviews in which writers comment on their creative process, showing that writing is not an individualized process brought about by a personal story, but a creation in which several vectors take part: technological, economic, aesthetic, etc. This contradicts two ordinary conceptions: the first states that the "spirit of time" determines the text, whereas for the second one the writer is the origin of the work – where he expresses his experiences and desires. Taking Roland Barthes’, Michel Foucault’s and Roger Chartier’s discussions about the author as a starting point, we seek to show that the idea of the text as a result of an individualized entity is not natural or obvious, having emerged around the seventeenth century, in order to punish those who wrote texts considered dangerous. This paper also investigates the main approaches of language studies in order to identify its implications for the understanding of writing. Therefore, it analyzes formalism and its emphasis on the invariants of language. According to formalism, literature is a case of speech, obeying the rules of the language. In contrast to this approach, we turn to the pragmatism of John Austin, which emphasizes the productive aspect of language and argues that statements are able to modify the empirical world, provided that they are pronounced in favorable situations. Still dealing with the pragmatic approach, we turn to Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. For them, a statement is not a matter of combinatorial rules of the language, but is capable of causing major changes in the language. In addition to that, statements can transform the empirical world even if there is no convergence between what is said and the social conventions. Deleuze and Guattari, as well as Blanchot and Foucault, focus on the relation of literature with resistance to domination practices, although with different nuances. Blanchot emphasizes the strangeness produced by the parole essentielle, as opposed to the familiarity of the parole brute. Foucault emphasizes the difference between speeches that allow the production of new speeches in opposition to those that end in themselves. Finally, Deleuze and Guattari focus on the major and minor uses of the language: the first has a lower coefficient of deterritorialization, while the latter is more permeable to destabilization. Somo of the writers whose interviews helped us think about the literary creation were: Milton Hatoum, Gullar, Carola Saavedra, Jorge Luis Borges, Ernest Hemingway and Christopher Tezza. Finally, the research conducted throughout this dissertation gave me ideas to write new stories of my own, some of which I have inserted between its chapters. Finally, based on John Dewey it is concluded that, so that aesthetic experience can take place in writing, there is a need for balance between passivity and activity. Thus, the writer needs to write, but also to be guided by what he perceives of his work: he is a writer and a reader simultaneously. So the creational process is neither an account of his life nor an invention ex nihilo, since it is also a subjectivity production process, relating to co-emergency of the artwork and the author. |
id |
UFF-7_f9b0fb13e7cadb5920cc5f2d2b8eee86 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/5851 |
network_acronym_str |
UFF-7 |
network_name_str |
Fractal : Revista de Psicologia |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the authorA escrita literária: a coemergência da obra e do autorwritingsubjectivity productionliteratureescritaprodução de subjetividadeliteraturaThe subject-matter of this paper is the process of literary writing, seeking to understand it according to its collective aspect. This theme emerged from the contact with interviews in which writers comment on their creative process, showing that writing is not an individualized process brought about by a personal story, but a creation in which several vectors take part: technological, economic, aesthetic, etc. This contradicts two ordinary conceptions: the first states that the "spirit of time" determines the text, whereas for the second one the writer is the origin of the work – where he expresses his experiences and desires. Taking Roland Barthes’, Michel Foucault’s and Roger Chartier’s discussions about the author as a starting point, we seek to show that the idea of the text as a result of an individualized entity is not natural or obvious, having emerged around the seventeenth century, in order to punish those who wrote texts considered dangerous. This paper also investigates the main approaches of language studies in order to identify its implications for the understanding of writing. Therefore, it analyzes formalism and its emphasis on the invariants of language. According to formalism, literature is a case of speech, obeying the rules of the language. In contrast to this approach, we turn to the pragmatism of John Austin, which emphasizes the productive aspect of language and argues that statements are able to modify the empirical world, provided that they are pronounced in favorable situations. Still dealing with the pragmatic approach, we turn to Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. For them, a statement is not a matter of combinatorial rules of the language, but is capable of causing major changes in the language. In addition to that, statements can transform the empirical world even if there is no convergence between what is said and the social conventions. Deleuze and Guattari, as well as Blanchot and Foucault, focus on the relation of literature with resistance to domination practices, although with different nuances. Blanchot emphasizes the strangeness produced by the parole essentielle, as opposed to the familiarity of the parole brute. Foucault emphasizes the difference between speeches that allow the production of new speeches in opposition to those that end in themselves. Finally, Deleuze and Guattari focus on the major and minor uses of the language: the first has a lower coefficient of deterritorialization, while the latter is more permeable to destabilization. Somo of the writers whose interviews helped us think about the literary creation were: Milton Hatoum, Gullar, Carola Saavedra, Jorge Luis Borges, Ernest Hemingway and Christopher Tezza. Finally, the research conducted throughout this dissertation gave me ideas to write new stories of my own, some of which I have inserted between its chapters. Finally, based on John Dewey it is concluded that, so that aesthetic experience can take place in writing, there is a need for balance between passivity and activity. Thus, the writer needs to write, but also to be guided by what he perceives of his work: he is a writer and a reader simultaneously. So the creational process is neither an account of his life nor an invention ex nihilo, since it is also a subjectivity production process, relating to co-emergency of the artwork and the author.A dissertação tem como tema o processo de escrita literária, buscando compreendê-lo considerando seu aspecto coletivo. Este tema surgiu a partir do contato com entrevistas em que escritores comentam seu processo de criação, evidenciando que a escrita não é um processo individualizado, resultante de uma história pessoal, mas uma criação da qual participam diversos vetores – tecnológicos, econômicos, estéticos, etc. Isso contradiz duas concepções corriqueiras: para a primeira o “espírito do tempo” determina os textos; para a segunda o escritor é a origem da obra e nela projeta suas vivências e seus desejos. Tomando como referência as discussões de Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault e Roger Chartier acerca do autor, procura-se evidenciar que a ideia de que o texto é fruto de uma entidade individualizada não é natural nem óbvia, mas surgiu por volta do século XVII, com vistas a punir aqueles que escreviam textos considerados perigosos. Este trabalho investiga ainda as principais vertentes de estudo da linguagem, buscando identificar suas consequências para a compreensão da escrita. Para isso, analisa o formalismo e sua ênfase nos invariantes da linguagem. Segundo essa vertente, a literatura é um caso de fala, obedecendo às regras impostas pela língua. Em contraposição a essa abordagem, recorremos ao pragmatismo de John Austin, que enfatiza o aspecto produtivo da linguagem e defende que os enunciados são capazes de modificar o mundo empírico, desde que sejam pronunciados em situações favoráveis. Ainda tratando da abordagem pragmática, toma-se como base Gilles Deleuze e Félix Guattari. Para eles, um enunciado não é uma simples combinatória das regras da língua, mas é capaz de provocar rachaduras em toda a linguagem. Além disso, os enunciados podem transformar o plano empírico sem depender da convergência entre o dito e as convenções sociais. Deleuze e Guattari, bem como Blanchot e Foucault, enfocam a relação da literatura com a resistência a práticas de dominação, embora com diferentes nuances. Blanchot enfatiza a estranheza produzida pela palavra essencial, em oposição à familiaridade da palavra bruta. Foucault aponta para a palavra que permite a produção de novos discursos, em oposição àquelas que se esgotam em si mesmas. Por fim, Deleuze e Guattari enfocam o uso majoritário e minoritário da língua: o primeiro mais capturável por práticas homogeneizantes e o segundo mais permeável às desestabilizações. Com base em John Dewey, conclui-se que, para haver experiência estética na escrita, é preciso um equilíbrio entre fazer e padecer. Assim, o escritor precisa escrever, mas também se deixar guiar pelo que percebe da sua obra: é escritor e leitor, agente e fruidor simultaneamente. Portanto, a sua criação não é nem um relato de sua vida nem uma criação ex-nihilo, pois o processo de criação também é um processo de produção de subjetividade, dizendo respeito à co-emergência da obra e do autor. Ao longo desta dissertação estão presentes falas de escritores que nos ajudam a pensar a criação literária: Milton Hatoum, Ferreira Gullar, Carola Saavedra, Jorge Luis Borges, Ernest Hemingway e Cristóvão Tezza. Por fim, a pesquisa realizada ao longo desta dissertação me lançou rumo à escrita de novos contos, alguns dos quais passaram a compô-la. ABEC2021-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo não avaliado por paresapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/article/view/585110.22409/1984-0292/v33i1/5851Fractal: Journal of Psychology; Vol. 33 No. 1 (2021); 47Fractal: Revista de Psicologia; v. 33 n. 1 (2021); 471984-029210.22409/1984-0292/v33i1reponame:Fractal : Revista de Psicologiainstname:Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)instacron:UFFporhttps://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/article/view/5851/28466Copyright (c) 2021 Veronica Torres Gurgelhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGurgel, Veronica Torres2021-03-01T09:16:18Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/5851Revistahttps://periodicos.uff.br/fractalPUBhttps://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/oai||anaclmonteiro@yahoo.com.br|| mlivianascimento@gmail.com1984-02921984-0292opendoar:2021-03-01T09:16:18Fractal : Revista de Psicologia - Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author A escrita literária: a coemergência da obra e do autor |
title |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author |
spellingShingle |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author Gurgel, Veronica Torres writing subjectivity production literature escrita produção de subjetividade literatura |
title_short |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author |
title_full |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author |
title_fullStr |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author |
title_full_unstemmed |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author |
title_sort |
Literary writing process: the coemergence of the work and the author |
author |
Gurgel, Veronica Torres |
author_facet |
Gurgel, Veronica Torres |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Gurgel, Veronica Torres |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
writing subjectivity production literature escrita produção de subjetividade literatura |
topic |
writing subjectivity production literature escrita produção de subjetividade literatura |
description |
The subject-matter of this paper is the process of literary writing, seeking to understand it according to its collective aspect. This theme emerged from the contact with interviews in which writers comment on their creative process, showing that writing is not an individualized process brought about by a personal story, but a creation in which several vectors take part: technological, economic, aesthetic, etc. This contradicts two ordinary conceptions: the first states that the "spirit of time" determines the text, whereas for the second one the writer is the origin of the work – where he expresses his experiences and desires. Taking Roland Barthes’, Michel Foucault’s and Roger Chartier’s discussions about the author as a starting point, we seek to show that the idea of the text as a result of an individualized entity is not natural or obvious, having emerged around the seventeenth century, in order to punish those who wrote texts considered dangerous. This paper also investigates the main approaches of language studies in order to identify its implications for the understanding of writing. Therefore, it analyzes formalism and its emphasis on the invariants of language. According to formalism, literature is a case of speech, obeying the rules of the language. In contrast to this approach, we turn to the pragmatism of John Austin, which emphasizes the productive aspect of language and argues that statements are able to modify the empirical world, provided that they are pronounced in favorable situations. Still dealing with the pragmatic approach, we turn to Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. For them, a statement is not a matter of combinatorial rules of the language, but is capable of causing major changes in the language. In addition to that, statements can transform the empirical world even if there is no convergence between what is said and the social conventions. Deleuze and Guattari, as well as Blanchot and Foucault, focus on the relation of literature with resistance to domination practices, although with different nuances. Blanchot emphasizes the strangeness produced by the parole essentielle, as opposed to the familiarity of the parole brute. Foucault emphasizes the difference between speeches that allow the production of new speeches in opposition to those that end in themselves. Finally, Deleuze and Guattari focus on the major and minor uses of the language: the first has a lower coefficient of deterritorialization, while the latter is more permeable to destabilization. Somo of the writers whose interviews helped us think about the literary creation were: Milton Hatoum, Gullar, Carola Saavedra, Jorge Luis Borges, Ernest Hemingway and Christopher Tezza. Finally, the research conducted throughout this dissertation gave me ideas to write new stories of my own, some of which I have inserted between its chapters. Finally, based on John Dewey it is concluded that, so that aesthetic experience can take place in writing, there is a need for balance between passivity and activity. Thus, the writer needs to write, but also to be guided by what he perceives of his work: he is a writer and a reader simultaneously. So the creational process is neither an account of his life nor an invention ex nihilo, since it is also a subjectivity production process, relating to co-emergency of the artwork and the author. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-03-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artigo não avaliado por pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/article/view/5851 10.22409/1984-0292/v33i1/5851 |
url |
https://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/article/view/5851 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.22409/1984-0292/v33i1/5851 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.uff.br/fractal/article/view/5851/28466 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Veronica Torres Gurgel https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Veronica Torres Gurgel https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
ABEC |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
ABEC |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Fractal: Journal of Psychology; Vol. 33 No. 1 (2021); 47 Fractal: Revista de Psicologia; v. 33 n. 1 (2021); 47 1984-0292 10.22409/1984-0292/v33i1 reponame:Fractal : Revista de Psicologia instname:Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF) instacron:UFF |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF) |
instacron_str |
UFF |
institution |
UFF |
reponame_str |
Fractal : Revista de Psicologia |
collection |
Fractal : Revista de Psicologia |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Fractal : Revista de Psicologia - Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||anaclmonteiro@yahoo.com.br|| mlivianascimento@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1799695292477472768 |