Mauricio Duplessis

The sociocritic is an approach of the literary Fait which is delayed with the social universe present in the Texte. With this intention, it is inspired so much and so well by similar disciplines as the Sociologie of the literature which one has tendency to confuse them. Also, for including/understanding well what it is it is important to start starting from the roots which are planted there. " The sociocritique" , word created by Claude Duchet in 1971, proposes a reading socio-history of the text. It was constituted little by little during the pre years and post- 68 to try to build “poetic sociality, inseparable from a reading from ideological in its textual specificity” (Claude Duchet).

History

One notices for first once a social approach of the literature in the Emile of J. - J. Rousseau then, in a more important way, in the work Of the literature considered in his relationship with the social institutions (1800) of Mrs. de Staël. A few years later Auguste Count and his historical approach will come from arts which one will also find in a major work of Taine named Philosophie of the art (1865) where it tries to explain a work compared to the social environment of his producer. One will see also the writings of Gustave Lanson approaching the text by stressing the reading itself. These fundamental approaches with sociocritic however show a methodological weakness and a inappreciable Subjectivité in this kind of approach.

The arrival of the theories Marxiste S on the company at the beginning of the XXe century deeply marked the social approach of the literature. From here several approaches of the literary fact were formulated different, that it is in bond with the concepts of Class struggle, from economy or Technologie. Let us think in particular of Th. W. Adorno, F. Mehring and P. Macherey which agree in one way or another to say that the Contexte of production of an artist brings some Idéologie which will be conveyed in a certain way by their works.

The influence of Marx and Durkheim

Parallel to the Marxiste S it is established about the Thirties a school based on the sociology of Durkheim and carried out by Jan Mukarovsky which considers the literature by the concept of collective Conscience. This last the bracket with the Interpretation of the texts by the companies, applicant whom it will be made mainly according to a particular Culture, thus giving a polysemous value to the Lecture.

Jean Duvignaud will apply same the Concept but this time while trying to explain the Phénomène creation in reactions to the social contexts as presented in works like collective Ombres. Sociology of the theater (1965). A fusion between these two great kinds, the Marxism and the Durkheimisme, occurred later in authors connecting the ideas of the large thinkers of which they are claimed. For example, Köhler used the systematic sociology inspired (inter alia) by Durkheim with the literary kind by introducing there the concept of class struggle suitable for Marx. It results from these various approaches sociocritic much more methodical and conceptual that to by before and who applies especially to the phenomena of creation and literary interpretation.

Lukàcs and Goldmann

About the same period one observes the appearance of a school being opposed to the Marxism carried out by max Weber and his Wertfreiheit . One claims there a more factual sociological approach of the literature, with a larger objectivity and without political consideration suggested. The theories of Alphons Sibermann and Hans Norbert Fügen which will result from this, much more interesting for critical work presented here, will propose an analysis whose object is only the text and its structures. One will refuse there the exploration of the context of creation or the interpretation of the readings thus marking a clear limit between the sociology of the literature and the sociocritique one. It will be however rejected by the partisans of the approaches Dialectique S such as Georg Lukács and Lucien Goldmann. It leaves despite everything a particular approach of the text, being delayed on the contents diegetic of works and appreciable by other critical methods like the Structuralisme. Between the approaches centered on Marx and Weber, another will be based primarily on the thought hégélienne. Renonçant with the political or practical aspirations of the Marxism and moving away from the ideal conveyed by the Wertfreiheit , Lukacs, Goldmann and Adorno of which we already spoke will formulate various new approaches of the literature. Lukacs will seek in the text a gasoline suitable to represent the social problems of the company of creation whereas Goldmann will explore the textual structures showing certain ideologies relating to the context of the author ( God hidden , 1956). Adorno will affirm that as for him the literature is autonomous and useless by its ambiguity and its Polysémie, thus marking a major separation of with the Marxists. One will thus seek a disengaged and dialectical approach of the literature, thus leaving place to a larger objectivity, to see total, in sociological criticism.

The sociocritique one: new prospects

During the years 1970, in the French-speaking field, the sociocritique one knew fresh impulse after, in particular, of the team works of Robert Escarpit (production and consumption of the literature), those of the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (“literary field”) and those of Claude Duchet on the “sociocritique one”. Several researchers opened new prospects of research such Jacques Dubois (institutional Analyze), Pierre V. Zima (Sociologie of the text), Marc Angenot (theory of the social dicours), Jacques Leenhardt (Sociologie of the reading), Edmond Cros (theory of the idéosèmes, theory of the cultural subject), work of the institute of sociocritic of Montpellier (Monique Carcaud-Macaire, Jeanne-Marie Clerc, Michele Soriano) etc

Related bonds

important Publications in sociology

External bonds

Sociocritique, sociocritic research (www.sociocritique.com)

Random links: