oops...i was so careful with the politics and then just walked right in it with the theory, didn't i :-)
i give you that there are some pretty bad lacan-inspired theories out there, but as a heavy duty recovering lacanian, i have to stand by "the master" :-)
oh...i understand what you meannow, but i wouldn't have called that meta necessarily...more like, bring your own theory and fit the text to it versus a text-intrinsic and even historically contextualized reading, maybe???
and yes, reception aesthetics, of course, needs to start at the level of the text...but i think a lot of times the debates *about* the text are at least as interesting and quite telling a lot of times. i especially love it when they mimic/reflect themes/dynamics within the text...
i'm not sure it's easier in literature than in your field b/c it's both words??? then again, we do it with film just as easily, so maybe not (music just intimidates me to no end, so...see me being intimidated :-)
no subject
i give you that there are some pretty bad lacan-inspired theories out there, but as a heavy duty recovering lacanian, i have to stand by "the master" :-)
oh...i understand what you meannow, but i wouldn't have called that meta necessarily...more like, bring your own theory and fit the text to it versus a text-intrinsic and even historically contextualized reading, maybe???
and yes, reception aesthetics, of course, needs to start at the level of the text...but i think a lot of times the debates *about* the text are at least as interesting and quite telling a lot of times. i especially love it when they mimic/reflect themes/dynamics within the text...
i'm not sure it's easier in literature than in your field b/c it's both words??? then again, we do it with film just as easily, so maybe not (music just intimidates me to no end, so...see me being intimidated :-)