Scan barcode
hann_thea's review
3.75
Ich habe in den letzten Wochen viel unnötigen Quatsch zu Fanatstik gelesen, da war dieser Text, der zurecht eine Grundlage des Forschungsgebietes ist, eine Erlösung.
Er ist sehr verständlich zu lesen und gut strukturiert. Große Abzüge muss ich aber leider für den Blick auf das 20. Jahrhundert machen. Kafka, einen Autor, der zurecht immer einen Sonderstatus hat, zum Repräsentanten eines Jahrhunderts zu machen und kurzerhand den Tod der Fanatstik (anhand von Psychoanalytikern wke Freud, die sich ja auch das 19. Jahrh ndert beziehen... hä...) zu verkünden, finde ich vor dem Hintergrund vieler andere Texte der Zeit sehr schwierig.
Trotzdem sehr empfehlenswert, wenn man sich für fantastische Literatur interessiert!
Er ist sehr verständlich zu lesen und gut strukturiert. Große Abzüge muss ich aber leider für den Blick auf das 20. Jahrhundert machen. Kafka, einen Autor, der zurecht immer einen Sonderstatus hat, zum Repräsentanten eines Jahrhunderts zu machen und kurzerhand den Tod der Fanatstik (anhand von Psychoanalytikern wke Freud, die sich ja auch das 19. Jahrh ndert beziehen... hä...) zu verkünden, finde ich vor dem Hintergrund vieler andere Texte der Zeit sehr schwierig.
Trotzdem sehr empfehlenswert, wenn man sich für fantastische Literatur interessiert!
thesupermassive's review
challenging
informative
reflective
4.25
i have reached the end of this book and somehow i feel like i have learned everything and simultaneously know less than before
Content Warnings
Moderate: Incest and Ableism
roseice's review
2.0
This book was fine. I had to write a paper on it though, so I think I got a little too much of it. It was just ok in the end.
naiapard's review
4.0
I had to try this book as I have a paper to write, but more than that, I kept hearing about its "revelatory" powers when it came to this dubious genre called FANTASY.
It is a surprisingly short book. It barely fills 200 pages. It is readable.
It is not that great as it is too much theory and too little "practicality". There are some critics that are mentioned at times and they are analyzed, but the examples of Fantasy novels are scarce or old or so vague that they get lost in the general fogginess.
There is no analyze on [b:The Lord of the Rings|33|The Lord of the Rings (The Lord of the Rings, #1-3)|J.R.R. Tolkien|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1566425108l/33._SX50_.jpg|3462456], for example, even if the book (this book) was finished in September 1968.
Here a quote:
“This is one of the constants of the literature of the fantastic: the existence of beings more powerful than men.”
Instagram\\my Blog\\
It is a surprisingly short book. It barely fills 200 pages. It is readable.
It is not that great as it is too much theory and too little "practicality". There are some critics that are mentioned at times and they are analyzed, but the examples of Fantasy novels are scarce or old or so vague that they get lost in the general fogginess.
There is no analyze on [b:The Lord of the Rings|33|The Lord of the Rings (The Lord of the Rings, #1-3)|J.R.R. Tolkien|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1566425108l/33._SX50_.jpg|3462456], for example, even if the book (this book) was finished in September 1968.
Here a quote:
Instagram\\my Blog\\
rvandenboomgaard's review
5.0
A beautiful example of the overlap of philosophy and literature; in theoretical shape.
Anybody intrigued by the philosophical potentialities of literature, as well as the literary potentialities of philosophy, should read this essay. It might be so Derridaean and deconstructionist as to the point of becoming instantly blasé, but the serious study of literature might indeed be the next step in the development of philosophy. More so than any kind of dry logic ever will.
Indeed, logic limits itself in its inherent setting of limitations, whereas literature breaks open that state of limitation through its inherent ambiguity. We need only realise that ambiguity does not always signify incongruity, nor incompatibility, but can also signify simultaneity.
Anybody intrigued by the philosophical potentialities of literature, as well as the literary potentialities of philosophy, should read this essay. It might be so Derridaean and deconstructionist as to the point of becoming instantly blasé, but the serious study of literature might indeed be the next step in the development of philosophy. More so than any kind of dry logic ever will.
Indeed, logic limits itself in its inherent setting of limitations, whereas literature breaks open that state of limitation through its inherent ambiguity. We need only realise that ambiguity does not always signify incongruity, nor incompatibility, but can also signify simultaneity.
amaltheasinclair's review
informative
medium-paced
4.0
Interessante Überlegungen über eine Definition der fantastischen Literatur!
himotoku's review
This essay attempts to define “the fantastic” genre by what I can only define as a process of elimination. By endeavoring to explicate what “it is not”, Todorov not only defines the genre in question, but also sheds light on other, adjacent genre (such as the marvelous, the mysterious and even some styles such as the poetic or the allegorical). It was a very interesting and enlightening read, if a little challenging. It is not, though, an entry level text, because, for all of its clarity, it presumes the reader to be already acquainted with a vast majority of literary and linguistic terminology, such as the difference between utterance and speech acts.
“If we try to transcend the words in order to reach the vision, the vision might be classified in the category of the supernatural: the octave which ensnares the days, the chant of the mountains, the earth’s sigh, etc. But here we must not follow such a path: the phrases quoted require a poetic reading, they do not tend to describe an evoked world. Such is the paradox of literary language: it is precisely when words are employed in the figurative sense that we must take them literally.”
“If we try to transcend the words in order to reach the vision, the vision might be classified in the category of the supernatural: the octave which ensnares the days, the chant of the mountains, the earth’s sigh, etc. But here we must not follow such a path: the phrases quoted require a poetic reading, they do not tend to describe an evoked world. Such is the paradox of literary language: it is precisely when words are employed in the figurative sense that we must take them literally.”
janeeyrezombiehunter's review
5.0
One of the more amazing works on the fantastic in literature, and an excellent entry point into narratological analysis! Thoroughly enjoyable reading.
mrs_duden's review
2.0
It was really easy to read, but I absolutely have no use for Todorov's Definition of the Fantastic.