 |
WORKSHOP RATIONALE (1) Progress in humanities and, similarly, in the
institution of literature, is part of the growing development - by
accumulation in science. Most of the times, this phenomenon has been
identified as consequence of “anomalies” depleted by changes of paradigm.
Therefore, as challenging forces could do, “anomalies’ may generate “the
changing of the rules of the game”, the framing of new perspectives
while probing and questioning the “norm” and normativity itself;
(2) In these late years, literature with the different media of its
representation (and of transmission), leading to further explorations of
the very notion of literature, has also mediated (sometimes from
antagonic, some other times from agonic position) between or among
various ways of reading and interpretation, bringing forth change within
the “art of reading”;
(3) The “art of reading” is posited against the backdrop of the
“conflict of interpretations” which is theoretically challenged by
academia in their communities and elsewhere. As “Literature” itself has
become its own problem (not only with Authorship turning upon itself in
the contemporary literature for that matter), to speak of solutions with
the wealth of interpretations means only to assess / to estimate (again)
the value of some (or many) of them: for no interpretation can stay
outside the changes in literature and changes of sensibility in readers,
at the outset of the new millennium. Moreover, as they say, there is no
shift or change (of perspective) outside a point of start and there is
no change, which any shift announces without the modernization of the
mind;
(4) As there are no “neutral facts” in literature, the relationship
between “the science of literature”(represented by literary history,
literary theory and criticism) and the “institution of literature”
represented – among other things - by the bond between the World –the
Author - the Text/ Work - the Reader, the two of them cannot aspire to
the tempering of the “conflict of interpretations” but by accepting the
re-thinking of its “frontiers” and by accepting supplementation.
 Program |
