Against Declarativity

Authors

  • Hans Kellner North Carolina State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2021.22.11544

Keywords:

Declarative act, History, Fiction, Narrative

Abstract

Historical discourse is a period phenomenon shaped by the rhetorical and genre understanding of the moment in which it became formalized and professionalized - that is, the second half of the nineteenth century. In the figurative arts, realist painting and its rival, photography, was dominant, and the literary form this notion of consciousness took was the realist novel. Literary realism devices replaced romantic literature devices, just as those latter devices had succeeded, but never replaced the eighteenth-century devices. Historical discourse and the very notion of proper history followed realism devices, mostly the single-lens photographic perspective, one viewer’s viewpoint. From a discourse perspective, this approach took the form of declarative, statement-making. Also, it is not to say that the declarative sentence which gives this term its name was rejected as the preferred way of making assertions about the world - far from it. Although a few self-conscious stylists (Derrida, for instance) work hard to avoid it, the declarative sentence is almost inevitable. Their readers work even harder. But just as narrativity encompasses a realm that extends far beyond narratives, so that narratives can proliferate in an environment that has, in a crucial sense, rejected grand narratives, so declarative statements will exist without entailing statement-making. The declarative act became the defining mark of professional history and remained its principal mode, just as it remains the predominant mode of literature and any number of other discourses. Indeed, this essay is written in the declarative rhetorical mode. However, literary modernism, philosophy, and a host of scientific developments have left this way of representing the world behind. Moreover, the same technological and intellectual changes that caused the modernist vision have, at the same time, created a different world to be depicted, a different sort of event to be represented historically. Not only the form but also the content have changed. The ethical and practical frustrations of representing such events have led to a theoretical challenge to the declarative form of knowing and to a challenge for the genre distinctions that constitute guild history: the idea of the past produced by academically professionalized individuals. For example, the difference between history and fiction - or rather, their respective relationship to truth and reality - has blurred. In contrast, history has adopted some of the modernist literature devices and the present’s practical demands.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Auerbach, E. (1953). Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. Tr W Trask. Princeton University Press. Princeton.

Bann, S. (1995). Romanticism and the Rise of History. Twayne. New York.

Braudel, F. & Reynolds, S. (1972). The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean world in the age of Philip II. Vol. 2.

Carrard, Ph. (1992). The Poetics of the New History. Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London.

Carrard, Ph. (2017). History as a Kind of Writing. University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London.

Cohn, D. (2000). The Distinction of Fiction. Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London.

Gossman, L. (1990). Between History and Literature. Harvard University Press. Cambridge & London.

Hutcheon, L. (1988). The Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction. Routledge. London.

Kellner, H. (1989). Language and Historical Representation: Getting the Story Crooked. The University of Wisconsin Press. Wisconsin

Kellner, H. (1991). "Beautifying the Nightmare: The Aesthetics of Postmodern History" in Strategies: A Journal of Theory. Culture, and Politics. 4/5 289-313.

Kellner, H. (2003). “However imperceptibly: From the Historical to the sublime”. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America. 118 (3). 591-596.

Kellner, H. (2008). "Emigrant Narratives and Their Devices in Spiegelman, Foer, and Sebald". In Trajectories of Memory: Intergenerational Representations of the Holocaust in History and the Arts. 175-190. Cambridge Scholars Pub. UK.

Kern, S. (2003). The Culture of Time and Space. Harvard University Press. Cambridge and London.

Lang, B. (1990). Act and Idea in the Nazi Genocide. Chicago University Press. Chicago and London.

Mink, L. (1987). Historical Understanding. B. Fay, E. Golub, R Vann. (eds). Cornell University Press. Ithaca and London.

Norfolk, L. (2003). Lemprière's Dictionary. Grove Press. New York.

Sebald, W.G. (2011). Austerlitz. Modern Library. New York.

Spiegelman, A. (1996). MAUS. Pantheon. New York and London.

Weaver, R. (2001). “Language is Sermonic,” in Bizzell, P., and Herzberg, B., The Rhetorical Tradition. Bedford/St Martins. Boston & New York.

White, H. (2010). The Fiction of Narrative. R. Doran. (ed.) Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London.

White, H. (1973). Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London.

White, H. (1978). Tropics of Discourse. Cornell University Press. Ithaca and London.

White, H. (1987). The Content of the Form. Cornell University Press. Ithaca and London.

White, H. (1999). Figural Realism. Cornell University Press. Ithaca and London.

White, H. (2014). The Practical Past. Northwestern University Press. Evanston and New York.

Published

2020-12-22

How to Cite

Kellner, H. (2020). Against Declarativity. Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Science, 22, 103-117. https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2021.22.11544
Received 2020-12-10
Accepted 2020-12-19
Published 2020-12-22