Tag Archives: Literary Pragmatics

Self-Evident Truths? Origin Myths and the Founding of America

Posted on by

LECTURES > PREVIOUS

Every people has stories that it tells about itself-stories about where it comes from, about its place in the universe, about its essential characteristics. Indeed, one of the key functions of “culture” is to impress these stories on each succeeding generation. When successful, this process makes these stories so “obvious” to insiders as to be self-evidently true (despite the fact that these same stories remain self-evidently dubious to outsiders). In these respects, the American people and American culture are no different than any others. From the beginning, Americans have constructed stories —political, historical, literary — as a way of defining themselves and their place in the world and thus as a way of shaping their destiny. A look at works as diverse as The Declaration of Independence, The Federalist Papers, The Scarlet Letter, The Gettysburg Address, and “Paul Revere’s Ride,” can illustrate this phenomenon and help us temporarily stand outside ourselves as we seek a better understanding of who we truly are. Continue reading →

Somebody Killed Something: Ambiguous Hero and Beast in Lewis Carroll’s ‘Jabberwocky’

Posted on by

WRITINGS > FINISHED

Since its publication in 1871 as part of Through the Looking-glass, Lewis Carroll’s “Jabberwocky” has become one of the quintessential examples of “nonsense poetry” in the English language. Such a classification largely reflects the poem’s apparent non-referentiality when set against the background of a theory of language that claims unambiguous reference as the sole (or at least, highest) goal of language use. Since Carroll used a number of words that appeared to have “no sense”, and hence no referents, “Jabberwocky” as a whole appeared to be not fully “meaningful”, and hence not fully referential — i.e. the poem appeared to be “nonsense”.
This paper argues that any analysis of “Jabberwocky” that begins and ends by noting the poem’s “faulty” referentiality misses the point. For it is precisely this referential ambiguity that Carroll uses to achieve an effect that could not be achieved via the use of fully referential language. In particular, Carroll has created a parody of a ballad of dragon-slaying in which ambiguities about the setting, the hero and the beast force readers/auditors to project their own knowledge, concerns and identities onto their “readings” of the text. In other words, the ambiguity in “Jabberwocky” is not a bug but a feature in a “readerly” text that speaks at once to the personal heroes and beasts in each of us.
To support this claim, three types of data are discussed. First, a semiotic analysis of the poem itself lays bare the means by which the text achieves its effects, focusing particularly on its invocation of an appropriate “beast genre” and on its poetic structure. Second, the cultural context which made (and makes) such a feat possible is considered. And finally, psychological findings about people’s processes of interpreting “Jabberwocky” are reported.
Ultimately, “Jabberwocky” is seen as highly meaningful, both “literally” and “metaphorically”, in ways that make it appropriate for inclusion in a child’s fairy-tale. Moreover, we arrive at a fuller appreciation of Carroll’s genius as an author in full control of his craft. Continue reading →

Somebody Killed Something: Ambiguous Hero and Beast in Lewis Carroll’s ‘Jabberwocky’

Posted on by

LECTURES > PREVIOUS

Since its publication in 1871 as part of Through the Looking-glass, Lewis Carroll’s “Jabberwocky” has become one of the quintessential examples of “nonsense poetry” in the English language.  Such a classification largely reflects the poem’s apparent non-referentiality when set against the background of a theory of language that claims unambiguous reference as the sole (or at least, highest) goal of language use.  Since Carroll used a number of words that appeared to have “no sense”, and hence no referents, “Jabberwocky” as a whole appeared to be not fully “meaningful”, and hence not fully referential — i.e. the poem appeared to be “nonsense”. Continue reading →

Literary Pragmatics and/of Homer’s Odyssey

Posted on by

WRITINGS > FINISHED

This paper is an essay in the full sense of the word: it is an attempt — an essay — to simultaneously work out two problems, one theoretical and one practical. On the one hand it seeks to articulate a theory of texts in social contexts. On the other it seeks to apply such a perspective to Homer’s Odyssey. From the point of view of the first problem, then, the Odyssey is simply an example, an empirical means to a theoretical end.  From the point of view of the second problem, however, an understanding of the Odyssey is an end in itself. Continue reading →

Greeks Bearing Texts; Or, Whose Odyssey is it Anyway?

Posted on by

WRITINGS > FINISHED [→ ONLINE ARCHIVE MATERIAL]

Did you ever want to be a hero? As a child did you ever fantasize about being the Lone Ranger? Or a knight in shining armor? Perhaps your taste ran more towards Superman and Batman. Do you remember the disappointment when you discovered that you would never be one? That heroes were fiction and that real life “just isn’t like that?” Do you remember all the other childish expectations you had for your adulthood that you surrendered as you discovered the limits of your ability? If so, you are not alone. From time immemorial, individuals have shared these dreams and disappointments and it is to you that the Odyssey is dedicated. Homer would like you to know that you were not mistaken as a child: You can be a hero. Indeed, you must be a hero for there is no other way. The Odyssey will show you how. Continue reading →