Devils and Angels: Textual Editing and Literary Theory

Cohen, Philip

ISBN 10: 0813913152 / ISBN 13: 9780813913155

Editore: University of Virginia Press, 1991

Riguardo questo articolo

0813913152. 1991, bright clean copy, no markings, no dustjacket, Professional booksellers since 1981.

Codice articolo 152513

Dati bibliografici

• Titolo: Devils and Angels: Textual Editing and Literary Theory
• Editore: University of Virginia Press
• Data di pubblicazione: 1991
• Lingua: Inglese
• ISBN 10: 0813913152
• ISBN 13: 9780813913155
• Rilegatura: Hardcover
• Condizione: Very Good
• Cataloghi dei venditori:
  • Literature & Literary

Descrizione articolo

Riassunto

"Literary theory and textual criticism have much to teach each other", writes Philip Cohen, who has collected this anthology of essays that seeks to bridge what he sees as a wide rift between textual and literary critics. While most Anglo-American textual scholars now stress the importance of authorial intention and its key role in editorial and interpretative work, many literary theorists still tend to ostracize the author and his intentions from any serious literary discussion. Any observer of the contemporary literary scene quickly notes the following paradox - many theorists refute the usefulness of authorial intention in their discussion and evaluation of texts composed with help from that very intention. This conundrum yields a great impasse: literary interpretation depends, to a degree, on which text the critic chooses to read. At this point the potential for mutual co-operation between the literary theorist and the textual editor comes into play. Editorial discussion on the issue of textual order would very much benefit from theorists' examination of this topic. Conversely, theorists might benefit from testing their theories against the copious empirical data on the creation and promulgation of literary works which textualists possess. The contributors to this collection known for the practical and theoretical work in editorial fields, look to recast in different ways the assumptions and working methods of Anglo-American editorial scholarship. Three respondents, in turn comment on the various essays.