What is literature, what is a text?

these first two chapters.

Klarer's Challenge to Conventional Definitions of "Text"

Klarer immediately signals his intention to question traditional notions of

"literature" and "text" by highlighting the "vagueness" and "lack of
substance" in common encyclopedic definitions. He starts by dissecting the
etymological roots of "literature" (from "lettera," smallest element of writing)
and "text" (from "textile," fabric of words), noting that these origins are "not
of great help" for a substantial definition. Instead, he advocates for viewing
them as "cultural and historical phenomena," which immediately broadens
the scope beyond mere written artifacts.

Here are the key ways Klarer challenges conventional definitions:

1. De-emphasizing "Pure" Written Expression:

o The Oral Dimension: Klarer explicitly states that "the acoustic
element, the spoken word, is an integral part of literature." He
points to "oral poetry" (epics recited by bards) as a predecessor
of literary expression and notes its modern revival in "audio-
literature and the lyrics of songs." This directly contradicts a
narrow view of literature as solely something written down.
o The Visual Dimension: He argues that writing is "always
pictorial" and traces how the visual component was "highly
privileged" in medieval illuminated manuscripts, only to be
"pushed into the background" with the printing press and the
rise of "pure writing" as an abstract medium. However, he then
immediately reintroduces it as crucial, noting its survival in
drama and its culmination in film.
2. Expanding the Medium and Form of "Text":
o Beyond the Book: Klarer repeatedly expands the concept of
"text" beyond the traditional printed book. He includes:
 Prehistoric cave paintings ("encoded" information as
visual signs).
 Oral poetry.
 Radio and "other sound carriers" (audio-literature, song
lyrics).
 Drama (combining acoustic and visual elements).
  Film ("word and picture are recorded and...can be looked
up at any time").
 Computer hypertexts and networks like the Internet
("writing is linked to sounds, pictures or even video clips").
o This progressive inclusion of diverse media—from ancient
visual art to digital networks—demonstrates a radical re-
conception of what constitutes a "textual manifestation."
3. Blurring Boundaries Between "Literary" and "Non-Literary"
Texts:
o "Text Type" and "Discourse": Klarer introduces the linguistic-
influenced concept of "text type" to include "highly conventional
written documents such as instruction manuals, sermons,
obituaries, advertising texts, catalogues, and scientific or
scholarly writing." He even broadens this further with
"discourse," which encompasses "any kind of classifiable
linguistic expression," both written and oral, based on thematic
or structural features.
o This is a direct challenge to the "aesthetic" or "artistic"
adjectives traditionally used to distinguish "literature" from "texts
of everyday use." By acknowledging these "non-canonical"
forms as valid "text types" and "discourses," Klarer
democratizes the definition of text, suggesting that even a
telephone book can be analyzed within a broader textual
studies framework.
4. Deconstructing the Primary/Secondary Source Divide:
o Historical Fluidity: He points out that the "strict separation of
primary from secondary sources is not always easy," citing the
17th and 18th-century literary essay as a historical example
that "bridged two text types."
o Deliberate Transgression: More significantly, he highlights
20th-century examples like T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land (with
footnotes in a poem) and Vladimir Nabokov's Pale Fire (a novel
structured as a critical edition with a fictitious poem and
commentary). These examples demonstrate a deliberate
"confusion of text types," where authors actively "neglect" or
"point out the arbitrariness" of this traditional categorization.
Nabokov's novel, which centers on a poem but is called a
novel, further "calls attention to the relativity inherent in the
traditional categorization of genres."
5. Challenging Fixed Genre Classifications:
 o While discussing "Major Genres," Klarer still uses traditional
terms like "epic, drama, and poetry" (or "fiction, drama, and
poetry"), but he immediately shows their historical fluidity and
interconnectedness. He traces the evolution of the novel from
epics and romances, emphasizing how new forms emerge from
and parody older ones (e.g., Cervantes' Don Quixote).
o He introduces "subgenres" not as fixed categories but as
constantly evolving and overlapping forms, like the picaresque,
Bildungsroman, epistolary, historical, satirical, utopian, gothic,
and detective novels, as well as the short story, novella, and
novelette. This constant differentiation and blurring of lines
within genres further undermines any static or conventional
definition of "literary text."

In summary, Klarer fundamentally challenges conventional definitions

of "text" by:

 Broadening its sensory scope: Moving beyond solely the written

word to include visual and acoustic elements.
 Expanding its media: Incorporating everything from cave paintings
to film and digital hypertexts.
 Democratizing its content: Including "non-canonical" written
documents and oral expressions under the umbrella of "text type" and
"discourse."
 Deconstructing academic boundaries: Showing how the distinction
between primary and secondary sources, and even traditional
genres, is historically contingent and deliberately challenged by
authors.

He argues that to truly understand literature and text, one must examine
them as dynamic "cultural and historical phenomena" rather than fixed,
universally defined entities. This sets the stage for a much more expansive
and interdisciplinary approach to literary studies than traditional definitions
would allow.

Klarer's expanded definitions of "literature" and "text" have profound

implications for how we analytically understand different genres, particularly
concerning their form, medium, and interpretation. His approach
encourages a fluid, contextual, and interdisciplinary methodology.
Here's how his definitions shape our analytical understanding:

1. Form: From Static Structure to Dynamic Evolution and Hybridity

o Challenging Fixed Formal Boundaries: Klarer's historical
overview of genres (e.g., epic evolving into novel, romance as a
precursor) discourages viewing genre forms as rigid, immutable
structures. Instead, he emphasizes their evolutionary nature,
showing how forms adapt, borrow, and transform over time.
The novel, for instance, isn't just a new form but a "parody and
synthesis of existing genres." This means analytical
understanding must be historical and comparative, tracing
influences rather than applying a checklist of fixed generic
traits.
o Embracing Hybridity and Overlap: His discussion of the
"literary essay" bridging primary and secondary sources, or
Nabokov's Pale Fire deliberately confusing text types, highlights
that forms are not always pure. Analytical approaches must be
prepared to identify and interpret hybrid forms, where
elements from different genres or text types (e.g., footnotes in
poetry, scholarly apparatus in a novel) coexist. This demands
an analysis that looks across traditional categories, rather than
strictly within them.
o Contextual Formal Analysis: When Klarer includes
"instruction manuals, sermons, obituaries" as "text types," he
implies that even these "non-canonical" forms have their own
conventions and structures that warrant analysis. This
broadens "formal analysis" to encompass the rhetorical and
organizational strategies of any coherent linguistic expression,
not just those deemed "aesthetic."
2. Medium: Beyond Print to Multi-Sensory and Intermedial
Engagement
o Medium as Integral to Form and Meaning: By asserting the
"visual" and "acoustic" elements as integral to literature, Klarer
forces us to recognize that the medium is not merely a
transparent vehicle for content, but an active shaper of
form and meaning.
 For oral poetry, analysis must consider mnemonic
devices, rhythmic patterns, and performance context.
  For medieval manuscripts, the aesthetic of script,
illumination, and layout becomes a crucial analytical
component, rather than just decorative packaging.
 For drama, the analysis extends beyond the script to
stage directions, performance space, and the actual
embodiment of characters by actors.
 For film, analytical understanding must integrate
cinematography, sound design, editing, and visual
storytelling alongside narrative.
 For hypertext/internet, analysis needs to account for
non-linear reading paths, interactivity, embedded
multimedia (sounds, pictures, video clips), and network
structures.
o Intermediality as a Field of Study: Klarer's progressive
inclusion of different media (painting, film, music, computer
networks) pushes literary studies towards an intermedial
perspective. Instead of isolating a text from its potential cross-
media connections, an analytical understanding now asks: How
does a novel adapt to film? How do song lyrics function as
poetry? How does a digital text leverage interactivity? This
opens up new avenues for comparing and contrasting
expressive strategies across different artistic and
communicative forms.
o Sensory Engagement: Recognizing the "visual" and "acoustic"
dimensions encourages an analytical approach that pays
attention to the sensory experience of the text, not just its
semantic content. How does the sound of words contribute to
the meaning? How do visual metaphors or structural
arrangements on a page impact comprehension?
3. Interpretation: From Universal Truths to Contextual, Relativistic,
and Interdisciplinary Approaches
o Historical and Cultural Context is Paramount: Klarer's
emphasis on literature and text as "cultural and historical
phenomena" shifts interpretation away from seeking timeless,
universal meanings. Instead, it demands that we consider the
conditions of their production and reception within specific
historical and cultural moments. This means understanding, for
example, why realism was a defining feature of the 18th-
century novel or how the rise of the printing press impacted
textual dissemination and form.
 o Relativism of Categorization: The examples of deliberately
blurred primary/secondary source distinctions (Eliot, Nabokov)
challenge interpreters to question the very categories they use.
Interpretation becomes an act of acknowledging the
constructed nature of "genre" or "text type," and sometimes
even analyzing how texts deconstruct these categories
themselves. This fosters a more critical and self-aware
interpretive stance.
o Interdisciplinary Tools: By legitimizing the analysis of diverse
media and "non-canonical" texts, Klarer implicitly calls for an
interdisciplinary interpretive toolkit.
 Linguistics is explicitly mentioned for "text types" and
"discourse."
 Film studies methods are applied to cinema and acoustic
media.
 Visual arts concepts (e.g., "spatial art" applied to
Vonnegut's non-linear narrative) are relevant.
 He even hints at the relevance of psychology for
character analysis, and sociological/historical approaches
for understanding genre shifts (e.g., rise of the middle
class and the novel).
o Re-evaluating "Objectivity": His discussion of "primary" and
"secondary" sources, and the inherent "subjective traits" in
literary interpretation versus the natural sciences, informs how
we approach scholarly analysis. It highlights that while
"objectivity" and "general validity" are ideals, the "tremendous
creative potential" of literary criticism lies in "changes of
perspective and varying methodological approaches." This
shapes interpretation as an ongoing, dynamic conversation
rather than a quest for a single, definitive reading.

In essence, Klarer's broadened definitions move literary and textual studies

from a potentially narrow, print-centric, and formally prescriptive discipline
to a dynamic, intermedial, and context-sensitive field. Our analytical
understanding of genres, their forms, media, and interpretation becomes
richer, more complex, and more attuned to the diverse ways humans
create and make meaning through various forms of "textual" expression.