‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play

This article begins by questioning the ethical turn in literary studies (Hillis Miller, Attridge) and suggests that this redirection has tended to downplay the importance of what Friedrich Schiller had labelled ‘the play-drive’ (Spieltrieb). Drawing on neuroscientist Jaak Panskepp’s findings concern...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Pagan, Nicholas Osborne
Format: Article
Published: Taylor & Francis 2018
Subjects:
_version_ 1796961356044304384
author Pagan, Nicholas Osborne
author_facet Pagan, Nicholas Osborne
author_sort Pagan, Nicholas Osborne
collection UM
description This article begins by questioning the ethical turn in literary studies (Hillis Miller, Attridge) and suggests that this redirection has tended to downplay the importance of what Friedrich Schiller had labelled ‘the play-drive’ (Spieltrieb). Drawing on neuroscientist Jaak Panskepp’s findings concerning the primacy of the play instincts, the article focuses on Wolfgang Iser’s ‘literary anthropology’ and a theory of reading that can describe games played by authors and readers in what, following Freud, may be called a ‘playground’ (Tummelplatz). Iser’s concepts ‘the fictive’ and ‘the imaginary’ are then placed alongside traditional concepts from play theory to explore an extract from Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye in which the protagonist plays with and dismembers a doll. This analysis appropriates, in particular, Iser’s ideas in order to highlight the fundamentally playful nature of our engagement with literature.
first_indexed 2024-03-06T05:53:01Z
format Article
id um.eprints-21050
institution Universiti Malaya
last_indexed 2024-03-06T05:53:01Z
publishDate 2018
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format dspace
spelling um.eprints-210502019-04-24T03:54:16Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/21050/ ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play Pagan, Nicholas Osborne PE English This article begins by questioning the ethical turn in literary studies (Hillis Miller, Attridge) and suggests that this redirection has tended to downplay the importance of what Friedrich Schiller had labelled ‘the play-drive’ (Spieltrieb). Drawing on neuroscientist Jaak Panskepp’s findings concerning the primacy of the play instincts, the article focuses on Wolfgang Iser’s ‘literary anthropology’ and a theory of reading that can describe games played by authors and readers in what, following Freud, may be called a ‘playground’ (Tummelplatz). Iser’s concepts ‘the fictive’ and ‘the imaginary’ are then placed alongside traditional concepts from play theory to explore an extract from Toni Morrison’s The Bluest Eye in which the protagonist plays with and dismembers a doll. This analysis appropriates, in particular, Iser’s ideas in order to highlight the fundamentally playful nature of our engagement with literature. Taylor & Francis 2018 Article PeerReviewed Pagan, Nicholas Osborne (2018) ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play. Journal of Language, Literature and Culture, 65 (1). pp. 11-22. ISSN 2051-2856, DOI https://doi.org/10.1080/20512856.2018.1443630 <https://doi.org/10.1080/20512856.2018.1443630>. https://doi.org/10.1080/20512856.2018.1443630 doi:10.1080/20512856.2018.1443630
spellingShingle PE English
Pagan, Nicholas Osborne
‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play
title ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play
title_full ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play
title_fullStr ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play
title_full_unstemmed ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play
title_short ‘Why Read Literature?’: Appeasing the Appetite for Play
title_sort why read literature appeasing the appetite for play
topic PE English
work_keys_str_mv AT pagannicholasosborne whyreadliteratureappeasingtheappetiteforplay