Based on the works of Stanley Romaine Hopper, Amos Niven Wil-der and David LeRoy Miller, the article introduces the programmatic determinants of theopoetics: 1) our topology of being has changed; 2) ...the Western consciousness is being transformed; 3) what matters in interpretation is the psychic depth which achieves modalities of identification through the power of imagination; 4) our theo-logoi belong to the realm of mythopoetic expressions and, therefore, theo-logos is not theo-logical but theo-poetic. The article then points to the contribution of such a project (a renewal of interest for imagination, correction of Bultmann’s programme of demythologization and poststructuralist »closing« into the text, shift towards socially relevant theology, understanding of the body beyond the Cartesian dualism of res extensa – res cogitans, emphasizing the importance of doxology, thanksgiving, experience and the everyday). Finally, the article points out a needed correction of the theopoetics project by distinguishing between the biblical and poetic discourse.
Based on the works of Stanley Romaine Hopper, Amos Niven Wilder and David LeRoy Miller, the article introduces the programmatic determinants of theopoetics: 1) our topology of being has changed; 2) ...the Western consciousness is being transformed; 3) what matters in interpretation is the psychic depth which achieves modalities of identification through the power of imagination; 4) our theo-logoi belong to the realm of mythopoetic expressions and, therefore, theo-logos is not theo-logical but theo-poetic. The article then points to the contribution of such a project (a renewal of interest for imagination, correction of Bultmann’s programme of demythologization and poststructuralist »closing« into the text, shift towards socially relevant theology, understanding of the body beyond the Cartesian dualism of res extensa – res cogitans, emphasizing the importance of doxology, thanksgiving, experience and the everyday). Finally, the article points out a needed correction of the theopoetics project by distinguishing between the biblical and poetic discourse.
Članak isprva kontekstualizira pojavu tzv. authorship studies koje su nastale kao svojevrsna reakcija na poststrukturalističko (R. Barthes i M. Foucault) redefiniranje autorstva. U taj se kontekst ...zatim pozicionira Harold Bloom. On je, naime, iz uvjerenja da su poststrukturalističke antihumanističke tendencije pokrenule degenerativne procese, pa u konačnici i rastakanje književnosti u prvi plan svoje književne teorije postavio kanon i autora. Dok se o prvome znatno pisalo, drugo – pitanje autorstva – u studijama o Bloomu uglavnom je zanemareno. Stoga se u članku pozornost pridaje ponajprije Bloomovu tumačenju autora. Nastoji se pokazati da njegovo shvaćanje autorstva (kao, uostalom, i kanona) proizlazi iz gnostičke tradicije (Valentin i Lurija). Autor je za Blooma, zaključuje se, ponajprije genij – onaj koji stvara potaknut „iskrom“, pneumom, božanstvom u dnu vlastita uma, što je zapravo također stanoviti antihumanizam.
The article contextualizes at first the occurrence of the so-called authorship studies that arose as a kind of reaction to the post-structuralist (R. Barthes and M. Foucault) redefinitionof authorship. Harold Bloom then positioned himself in this context. Namely, from the belief that post-structuralist anti-humanist tendencies initiated degenerative processes, and ultimately the disintegration of literature, he placed the canon and the author at the forefront of his literary theory. While much has been written about the first term, the second—the question of the authorship—has been mostly neglected in Bloom studies. Therefore, the article focuses primarily on Bloom’s interpretation of the author. The article tries to show that his understanding of authorship (as well as the canon, after all) derives from the Gnostic tradition (Valentin and Luria). For Bloom, the author is, it is concluded, primarily a genius—one who creates inspired by a “spark,” a pneuma, a divinity at the bottom of one’s own mind, which is actually also a certain form of anti-humanism.
Kada se u drugoj polovici devetnaestoga stoljeća pokušala konstituirati, znanost o kulturi (Science of Culture) predstavljala se je kao reformska znanost. Ona je bila reformska ponajprije u smislu ...emancipacije od metafizike i teologije, ali također i u smislu društvenog napretka (E. B. Tylor). Znanost o kulturi, koja se pokušala zasnovati kao kohezijsko mjesto za sve društveno-humanističke znanosti i postati reformska, postala je u konačnici interpretativna znanost (C. Geertz). Tako shvaćena znanost o kulturi također ima reformatorski afinitet. U radu se – nakon osvrta na devetnaestostoljetnu znanost o kulturi – donose temeljne odrednice Geertzove teorije kulture i postliberalne teologije, koja se uvelike zasnovala upravo na Geertzu. Konačno, izlaže se reformski potencijal interpretativne znanosti o kulturi i postliberalne teologije.
Teologija i književnost Šimić, Krešimir
Anafora (Osijek, Croatia),
2019, Letnik:
6, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Kulturalni antropolog Clifford Geertz, iznimno referentan autor unutar područja humanističkih znanosti, početkom je osamdesetih godina prošloga stoljeća konstatirao da su se u humanističkim (također ...i u društvenim i prirodnim) znanostima pojavili „zamućeni žanrovi“ (blurred genres): filozofska istraživanja nalikuju književnim teorijama, znanstvene rasprave izgledaju kao morceaux lijepe književnosti, empirijska istraživanja kao barokne fantazije, povijest kao iskazi svjedoka na sudu, dokumentarna djela kao istinske ispovijedi, teorijske rasprave nalikuju putopisima, epistemološke studije konstruirane su kao politički traktati, metodološke polemike oblikovane su kao osobni memoari
When its constitution was attempted in the second half of the nineteenth century, the science of culture (Culturology, L. White) was represented as a reform science. It was a reform in the sense of ...emancipation concerning metaphysics and theology, but also regarding social progress (E. B. Tylor). The science of culture, which has tried to establish itself as a cohesive place for all socio-humanistic sciences and become reform science, has eventually become the interpretative science (C. Geertz). Interpretative science of culture also has a reformative affinity. After reviewing the nineteenth-century science of culture (anthropology), the paper introduces the fundamental determinants of Geertz’s theory of culture and postliberal liberal theology, primarily based on Geertz. Finally, the paper reveals the reform potential of interpretative science of culture and postliberal theology.
Croatian Renaissance literary culture did not form its literary in the same way as did the Italians. Therefore, the "canonical order" of sixteenth-century Croatian literary culture is usually ...associated with the nineteenth-century and twentieth-century synthetic literary history. However, if we have in mind the thesis of Harold Bloom that "canonical writers" are those in whose poetics exhibit "anticanonical elements," or in other words, that all great writers reading their predecessors face the fear of the impact and enable activities of their own imagination, then we can say – albeit very cautiously – that Croatian Renaissance literary culture has at least a few "canonical authors": Mavro Vetranović, Petar Zoranić, Petar Hektorović and Marin Držić
In the literary-historical study, Mavro Vetranić’ Suzana čista has been viewed as sacra rappresentazione, and only sometimes as related to Biblical drama. In this article it is argued that Vetranović ...has been strongly influenced by the humanistic religious drama which in its structure and style is based on the Renaissance concept of the antique theatre, while in its theme on biblical-apocrypha motifs. The influence of the humanistic religious drama in Suzana čista can be seen in the following: the classical Aristotelian drama principle (the unity of action and time that is confined to the single revolution of the sun and Aristotelian-Horatius rule of the scene (the drama place is always in exterior), and in the declamatory and rhetoric parts as well as in the thematic embodiment of Suzana čista in the European drama tradition of the XVI century (so called Christian humanism).
U članku se, nakon uvodnog kontekstualiziranja, prvo donosi kratka eksplikacija tvrdnje Hansa Freia da je osamnaestostoljetna i devetnaestostoljetna biblijska hermeneutika uslijed ...apologetsko‑interpretativnih nastojanja (tumačenje Biblije interpretativnim teorijama zasnovanim na racionalističkom kanonu i povijesnoj faktualnosti) dovela do »pomračenja« literalnog čitanja biblijskog narativa. Zatim se ukazuje na alate i koncepte (»realistički narativ«, »narativni identitet«, konsenzualno tumačenje) kojima je Frei na nov način tumačio literalno značenja biblijskih narativa. Konačno, u zaključku se iznose prednosti i nedostaci Freieva projekta te autorska tvrdnja zasnovana na patrističko‑medievalnoj egzegetskoj tradiciji, koju Frei potpuno zanemaruje, da Riječ Božja nije samo tekst (Biblija), lingvistička prezencija Boga, nego i corpus, tjelesna prisutnost Boga.
PDF
