Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Handbook
Approaches to Interdisciplinary Studies in the Arts and Humanities
Fall 2002
Copyright@ Rainer Schulte
2.01
APPROACHES TO INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES IN THE ARTS & HUMANITIES
Table of Contents
0.01 Title Page1.01 Introduction 2.01 Table of Contents3.01 Textbooks4.01 Seminar Outline (Syllabus)/ Requirements 5.01 How To Books/Reference Books6.01 Information/Reference Journals 7.01 Arts & Humanities Journals/Journals at UTD8.01 Reading List: Master Book List9.01 Reading List: Interdisciplinary Articles10.01 Reading List: Multimedia and Computer11.01 Reading List: Contemporary Arts12.01 Reading List: Music13.01 Reading List: Comparative Literature14.01 Reading List: Historical Studies15.01 Suggestions for Book Reports16.01 Projects17.01 Futurology/Futurism 18.01 Multiple Interpretations
Music: J.S. Bach. Italian Concerto; Beethoven. Sonata.Visual Arts: Guernica; Chairs; Human Figure; The Tree. Literary Texts: Anthology of Multiple Translations
19.01 Three TracksAesthetic Studies/Arts and PerformanceHistorical Studies/History of Ideas Literary Studies
20.01 Essays by Rainer Schulte on Translation and Interdisciplinary StudiesTRANSLATION AND READING TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETATIONTHE ACT OF TRANSLATION: FROM INTERPRETATION TO INTERDISCIPLINARY THINKINGLITERARY TRANSLATION: AN ANCHOR OF INTERDISCIPLINARY THINKINGLITERARY TRANSLATION: TOWARD AN ESTHETIC OF COMPLEXITYINTERPRETIVE APPROACHES TO VERBAL AND NON-VERBAL TEXTSMULTIPLE TRANSLATIONS: INTERPRETIVE PERSPECTIVETHE ART AND CRAFT OF TRANSLATION: RE-CREATIVE DYNAMICS IN CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
2.02
21.01 Essays on Interdisciplinary StudiesJacques Barzun. "Food for the NRF"Jacques Barzun. "Scholarship Versus Culture"Joe David Bellamy "On Pens and $words”Saul Bellow. "Literature in the Age of Technology"Allan Bloom. "Our Listless Universities"Norman Cantor. "The Real Crisis in the Humanities Today"Fritjof Capra. "The Turning Point: A New Vision of Reality"Stanley Fish. "Being Interdisciplinary Is So Very Hard To Do"Charles Frankl. "Why The Humanities?"Jerry G. Gaff. "Interdisciplinary Studies in Higher Education"Hugh Kenner. "Libraries and Glowlamps: a strategy of reassurance"Vladimir Nabokov. "Good Readers and Writers"Joan Oleck. "Versions of Visions" Octavio Paz. "Translation: Literature and Letters" John C. Sawhill. "The Unlettered University"William D. Schaefer. "Still Crazy after all these Years" Rainer Schulte. Futurology and the HumanitiesTamara Swora and James L. Morrison. "Interdisciplinarity and Higher Education"
22.01 Collection of PoemsMargaret Atwood: "This is a Photograph of Me"Archibald MacLeish: "Ars Poetica"W.S. Merwin: "In Autumn" and "April"Rainer Maria Rilke. "The Panther"William Carlos Williams: "Nantucket"
"The Red Wheel Barrow" Wallace Stevens: "Disillusionment of Ten O'Clock"
"Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird"
23.01 List of Nobel Prize Winners in Literature24.01 List of Contemporary Writers, Artists, and Composers25.01 Interdisciplinary Minds (list of names)26.01 Scholarly Jargon27.01 University and Small Presses 28.01 Library Orientation 29.01 Thesis/Dissertation Guidelines
3.01
TEXTBOOKS FOR HUMA 5300 Fall 2002
Schulte/Mitchell. Continental Short Stories: The Modern Tradition.
Bernstein, L. The Unanswered Question. (pbk)
Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolution. (latest Edition. pbk) Chicago.
Huizinga, J.J. Homo Ludens. ISBN 0-807046817
Peter Burke. New Perspectives on Historical Writing.
Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space. (pbk)
Schulte. The Geography of Translation and Interpretation: Traveling Between Languages
Dennis A. Trinkle and Scott A. Merriman, Editors. The History Highway: A Guide to Internet Resources.
4.01
Syllabus and Assignments
5.01How To Books
Ciardi, John. How Does A Poem Mean? Boston. Houghton Mifflin Company. 1959.
Raffel, Burton. How To Read A Poem. New York. New American Library. 1984.
Adler, Mortimer J. and Charles Van Doren. How To Read A Book: The Classic Guide To Intelligent Reading. New York. Simon and Schuster. 1940 and 1972.
Monaco, James. How To Read A Film: the art, technology, language, history, and theory of film and media. New York. Oxford University Press. 1977.
Finn, David. How To Look At Photographs. New York. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1994.
Finn, David. How To look At Sculture. New York. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1989.
Finn, David. How To Visit A Museum. New York. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1985.
Yenawine, Philip. How To Look At Modern Art. New York. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. 1991.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Rick E. Robinson. The Art Of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic Encounter. Malibu, California. J. Paul Getty Museum and the Getty Center for Education in the Arts. 1990.
John Berger. Ways of Seeing. New York. Penguin Books. 1983. ISBN 0-14-021631-6.
Raffel, Burton. The Art of Translating Prose. University Park, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania State University Press. 1994.
Raffel, Burton. The Art of Translating Poetry. University Park and London. The Pennsylvania State University Press. 1988.
Felstiner, John. Translating Neruda: The Way to Macchu Picchu. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press. 1980.
Bernstein, Leonard. The Unanswered Question: Six Talks at Harvard. Cambridge. Harvard University Press. 1976.
6.01
INFORMATION/REFERENCE JOURNALS
Publishers WeeklyChoice MagazineLibrary JournalTLS (Times Literary Supplement)New York Times Sunday Book ReviewThe New York Review of Books Book World (Washington Post)Book Review Section of the Los Angeles Times London Review of Books The Chronicle of Higher Education Small Press: The Magazine and Book Review of Independent PublishersScholarly Publishing Humanities (published by the National Endowment for the Humanities)The Futurist World Literature Today Imagination The Women's Review of BooksPoets & Writers; The Writer’s Chronicle (AWP)
Lettre internationalLa Quinzaine LittéraireLe Magazine LittéraireLetras Libres Merkur
ART JOURNALS
Art in AmericaArt NewsArts MagazineFlash ArtNew Art ExaminerArt ForumThe New Criterion
6.02THEATRE JOURNALS
TheaterDramaModern International DramaTheatre JournalNew Theatre QuarterlyTheater ThreeTheatre Research InternationalTheatre SurveyPerforming Arts JournalPlays InternationalModern DramaLatin American Theatre ReviewJournal of Dramatic Theory and CriticismTheater heute
DANCE JOURNALS
Dance ChronicleDance Theatre Journal Contact QuarterlyDance and Dancers
FILM JOURNALS
American CinematographerAmerican FilmCineasteCinema JournalFilm CommentFilm Library QuarterlyFilm QuarterlyFilm and FilmingSightlinesSoviet Film
6.03PHILOSOPHY JOURNALS
American Philosophical QuarterlyEthicsJournal of Aesthetics and Art CriticismJournal of PhilosophyJournal of the History of IdeasJournal of the History of PhilosophyPhilosophical ReviewPhilosophical BooksPhilosophyPhilosophy of SciencePhilosophy TodayReview of Metaphysics
HISTORICAL STUDIES
History and TheoryJournal of Interdisciplinary History Journal of the History of IdeasPhilosophy of SciencePhilosophy and Public AffairsPast & PresentHistorical JournalAmerican QuarterlyBritish Journal of Sociology European Archives of SociologyAmerican Journal of SociologyDaedalusAmerican ScholarBlack ScholarSocial ResearchTheory and SocietyPolitics and SocietyComparative Studies in Society and HistoryJournal of American StudiesJournal of the History of Behavorial SciencesJournal of Film, Television and RadioCritical InquiryNew Literary HistoryLiterature and History New Left Review
6.04MindPhilosophical ForumTechnology and SocietyJournal of PsychohistoryPsychohistory ReviewHistorical MethodsRepresentationsJournal of Modern HistoryPhilosophy of Social ScienceTheory and PracticeHypatiaPhilosophy and Phenomenological ReviewReview of MetaphysicsSocial Studies of ScienceSignsHistory Workshop JournalPhilosophyPhilosophy, Politics and SocietyPolitical StudiesPolitical Science QuarterlyTelosNew German CritiqueEnglish Literary HistoryJournal of PhilosophyPhilosophical QuarterlyPolitical TheoryEssays in CriticismThe MonistDiacriticMan and WorldPhilosophy and Rhetoric
HISTORY OF SCIENCE
The British Journal for the History of ScienceAnnals of ScienceHistory of Science(In the April 1987 issue of Choice is a bibliographical essay on "History of Science and Technology for Liberal Arts Colleges: Building a Useful Collection" by Ronald F. White. (1181-1189)
6.05LITERARY JOURNALS
The American Poetry ReviewAntaeusAntioch ReviewBlack Warrior Review Boston ReviewBoundary 2Calyx: A Journal of Art and Literature by WomenThe Chariton ReviewChelseaChicago ReviewDimension2FieldThe Georgia ReviewThe Greenfield ReviewThe Hudson ReviewThe Iowa ReviewIronwoodThe Kenyon ReviewThe Literary ReviewMalahat ReviewThe Massachusetts ReviewMississippi ReviewMissouri ReviewModern International DramaNew LettersNimrodThe North American ReviewNorthwest ReviewThe Ohio ReviewThe Paris ReviewParnassusPartisan ReviewPloughsharesPoetryQuarterly Review of Literature Review of National LiteraturesSalmagundi
6.06The Sewanee ReviewShort Story InternationalSouthern Humanities ReviewThe Southern ReviewTranslation ReviewTriquarterlyWorld Literature Today
7.01
JOURNALS
UTD HOLDINGS
The American Scholar AP2.A4572
Common Knowledge AP2.C66
Comparative Literature PN851.C595
Comparative Literature Studies PN851.C63
Critical Inquiry NX1.C64
Criticism AS30.W3 A2
Daedalus Q11.B7
Diacritics PN80.D5
Hudson Review AP30.H886
Humanist B821.A1 H8
Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism N1.J6
Journal of Modern Literature PN2.J6
Journal of the History of Ideas B1.J75
Modern Language Notes PB1.M6
Modern Fiction Studies PS379.M55
Modern Language Journal PB1.M47
Mosaic: Journal for the Comparative Study of Literature and the Arts Q11.U8216 (Wash.) PN2.M68 (Canada)
New Literary History PR1.N44
PMLA PN22.A57.02
Partisan Review HX1.P2
Perspectives on Contemporary Literature E169.1.P4782 (London)
Semiotica B820.S45
Sewanee Review AP2.S5
Signs HQ1101.S5
Southern Review AP30.S8555
Studies in the Novel PN3311.S82
Tri-Quarterly PS508.C6 T7
Twentieth Century Literature PN2.T8
Western Humanities Review F821.U8
World Literature Today Z1007.B717
Yale French Studies DC1.Y3
8.01
MASTER BOOK LIST FOR HUMA 5300
Agresto, John & Peter Riesenberg. The Humanist as Citizen.
Arendt, Hannah. The Human Condition.
Armstrong, Robert P. Wellspring.
Arnheim, Rudolf. Visual Thinking.
Arnheim, Rudolf. Art and Visual Perception. California: University of California Press, 1954.
Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space.
Bachofen, I. Myth, Religion, and Mother Right.
Baier, Kurt and Nicholas Rescher, eds. Values and the Future. NY: Free Press, 1969. Selection of 17 essays by such futurists as Theodore Gordon, Olaf Helmer, Kenneth Boulding, and others.
Barrett, William. A Time of Need: Forms of Imagination in the 20th Century.
Barrett, William. Irrational Man. Doubleday Anchor.
Barthes, Roland. The Pleasure of the Text.
Barthes, Roland. Image, Music, Text.
Barzun, Jacques. The House of Intellect.
Barzun, Jacques. Simple and Direct.
Barzun, J. and Graff, Henry. The Modern Researcher.
Bateson, Gregory. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. .
Beardsley, Monroe C. Aesthetics from Classical Greece to the Present.
Becker, Ernest. The Birth and Death of Meaning.
Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York: The Free Press, 1973.
8.02
Bell, Daniel. The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting. NY: Basic Books, 1973.
Bernstein, L. The Unanswered Question.
Bergson, Henri. Creative Evolution. Translated by Arthur Mitchell. New York: The Modern Library, 1944.
Bergson, Henri. Laughter.
Boulding,Kenneth. The Meaning of the Twentieth Century: The GreatTransition. NY: Harper and Row, 1964.
Bronowski, J. Science and Human Values.
Bronowski. J. The Ascent of Man.
Bronowski, J. The Visionary Eye
Brook, Peter. The Empty Space.
Capra, Fritjof. The Turning Point.
Cassirer, Ernst. Language and Myth.
_______________. The Logic of the Humanities.
_______________. The Problem of Knowledge.
Copland, Aaron. What to Listen for In Music.
Cornish, Edward. The Study of the Future.
Curtius, Ernst. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages.
Davenport, William W. The One Culture.
8.03deSaussure, Ferdinand. General Course in Linguistics.
Drucker, Peter. The Age of Discontinuity. NY: Harper & Row, 1969.
Ellul, Jacques. The Technological Society. NY: Knopf, 1964.
Foucault, Michel. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of Human Sciences.
Freud, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo.
Freud, Sigmund. Wit and the Subconscious.
Fuller, R. Buckminster. Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth. New York: Pocket Books, 1970. (Also Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1969)
Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures. NY: Harper, 1960. pp. 23-38.
Giedion, S. Mechanization Takes Command.
Giedion, S. Space, Time, and Architecture.
Gombrich, E.H. Art and Illusion.
Hall, Edward T. Beyond Culture.
Heidegger, Martin. Trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. Being and Time. New York: Harper and Row, 1962.
Heilbroner, Robert L. An Inquiry into the Human Prospect. New York: W. W. NOrton, 1974.
Heisenberg, Werner. Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Sciences.
Holton, Gerald. Science and Culture: A Study of Cohesive and Disjunctive Forces. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1965.
8.04Huizinga, J.J. Homo Ludens.
Husserl, Edmund. Tr. Quentin Lauer. Phenomenology and the Crisis of Philosophy. Harper and Row, 1965.
Jaspers, Karl. Man in the Modern Age.
Jung, C.G. Man and His Symbols.
Jung, Carl. Memories, Dreams, Reflections.
Kaiser. The Grotesque in Art and Literature.
Kaufman, Walter. The Future of the Humanities.
Kepes, Gyorgy. The New Landscape in Art and Science.
Kockelmans, Joseph J., ed. Interdisciplinarity and Higher Education.
Koestler, Arthur. The Act of Creation.
Koestler, Arthur. The Roots of coincidence.
Koeslter, Arthur. The Ghost in the Machine.
Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolution..
Leonard, George. Education and Ecstacy.
Lewis, C.S. The Discarded Image.
Lovejoy, Arthur. The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea.
May, Rollo. The Courage to Create.
McCauley, Carol Spearin. Computer and Creativity. Prager, 1974.
8.05McLuhan, H. Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.
Mead, Margaret. World Enough: Rethinking the Future. Boston: Little, Brown, 1975.
Mitchell, J.L. ed. Computers in the Humanities.
Moholy-Nagy, L. The New Vision.
Moholy-Nagy, L. Vision in Movement.
Monaco, James. How to Read a Film.
Morgan, George W. The Human Predicament: Dissolution and Wholeness. Providence, Brown University Press, 1968.
Mumford, L. The Condition of Man.
Nietzsche. Beyond Good and Evil. (1886), Tr. W. Kaufmann. Vintage.
Ortega y Gasset. The Dehumanization of Art.
Panofsky, Erwin. Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism.
Paz, Octavio. Marcel Duchamp, or the Castle of Purity.
Polyani. Personal Knowledge.
Poulet, George. Studies in Human Time.
Read, Herbert. Education through Art.
Reich, Robert B. The Next American Frontier.
Report of the Commission on the Humanities. The Humanities in American Life.
Ricoeur, Paul. Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970. esp. "Language, Symbol, and Interpretation," pp. 3-19; "The Conflict of Interpretations," pp. 20-36; "Hermeneutic Method and Reflective Philosophy," pp. 37-58.
8.06Rossi, Paolo. Philosophy, Technology and the Arts in the Early Modern Era. Simon, Sidney B., Leland W. Howe, and Howard Kirschenbaum. Values Clarification. Hart Publishing Co., 1972.
Snow, C.P. The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution.
Sontag, Susan. Against Interpretation (esp. "Against Interpretation," "Happenings: An Art of Radical Juxtaposition," "Notes on Camp")
Sontag, Susan. Styles of Radical Will ("The Aaesthetics of Silence")
Spengler, Oswald. The Decline of the West.
Steiner, George. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation.
Stravinsky, Ivor. The Poetics of Music.
Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre. Human Energy.
Thomas, Lewis. The Lives of a Cell.
Thompson, William I. At the Edge of History.
Toffler, Alvin. The Third Wave.
Toffler, Alvin. Learning for Tomorrow: The Role of Future in Education.
Toffler, Alvin. Future Shock. New York: Random House, 1970.
Tuckman, Barbara. A Distant Mirror.
Weber, Max. "The Protestant Ethic," and "Science as a Vocation."
8.07
Whitehead, Alfred North. Science and the Modern World. New York: The Free Press, 1967.
Wiener, Norbert O. The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations (Blackwells, 1953).
White, Hayden. Metahistory.
Addendum
Alter, Robert. The Pleasures of Reading in an Ideological Age.
Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature.
Baker, Paul. Integration of Abilities: Exercises for Creative Growth.
Barricelli, Jean-Pierre and Joseph Gibaldi. Editors. Interrelations of Literature.
Barzun, Jacques. The Culture We Deserve.
Battcock, Gregory. Editor. New Ideas in Art Education.
Berger, John. Ways of Seeing.
Blanchot, Maurice. The Space of Literature.
Bloom, Harold. The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages.
Caillois, Roger. Man, Play, and Games.
Cantor, Norman and Richard Schneider. How to Study History.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Rick E. Robinson. The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic Encounter.
Davis, Douglas. Art and the Future.
Delany, Paul and George Landow. Hypermedia and Literary Studies.
Dickie, George and Richard J. Sclafoni. Aesthetics: A Critical Anthology.
D’Souza, Dinesh. Liberal Education: The Politics of Race and Sex on Campus.
Dubos, René. A God Within: A Positive View of Mankind’s Future.
Eco, Umberto. The Role of the Reader.
Felming, William. Arts & Ideas.
Fiedler, Leslie. What is Literature?
Foucault, Michel. The Order of Things.
Gilbert, Felix and Stephen Graubard. Historical Studies Today.
Hofstadter, Douglas. Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid.
Klein, Julie Thompson. Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, & Practice.
Konner, Melvin. The Tangled Wing: Biological Constraints on the Human Spirit.
LaCapra, Dominick. Rethinking Intellectual History: Texts, Contexts, Language.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By.
Meyer, Leonard. Music, the Arts, and Ideas: Patterns and Predictions in Twentieth-Century Culture.
Naisbitt, John. Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming our Lives.
Negroponte, Nicholas, being digital.
Pagels, Heinz R. The Dreams of Reason: The Computer and the Rise of the Sciences of Complexity.
Rawls, John. Theory of Justice.
Schorske, George. Fin-de-Siècle Vienna: Politics and Culture.
Steiner, George. In Bluebeard’s Castle: Some Notes towards the Redefintion of Culture.
Taylor, Gary. Reinventing Shakespeare: A Cultural Hsitory from the Restoration fo the Present.
Tomkins, Calvin. The Bride and the Bachelors. Five Masters of the AVant-Garde. Duchamp, Tinguely, Cage, Rauschenberg, Cunningham.
9.01 Interdisciplinary Articles
Adams, Bernard S. "Liberal Education and the `New Vocationalism'," Liberal Education, Oct. 1975, Vol. LXI, no. 3, pp. 339-348.
Adams, Hazard, "The Importance of Individual Vision," Chronicle of Higher Education, May 9, 1977.
Adams, Robert Martin, "What Was Modernism?" The Hudson Review, May 1, 1978, pp. 19-33.
Adler, Mortimer J. "The Disappearance of Culture," Newsweek, August 2, 1978.
Altbach, Philip G. "Higher Education Without Boundaries," The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 18, 1977.
Arendt, Hannah, "The Vita Activa and the Modern Age" in The Human Condition, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1958. pp. 248-326.
Barrett, William, "The Testimony of Modern Art," In Irrational Man, pp. 37-57.
Barricelli, Jean-Pierre, "The Place of Comparative Literature in Interdisciplinary Studies: A Symposium," MLA Convention, December, 1974.
Bartuska, Tom J. and Gerald L. Youn, "Aesthetics and Ecology: Notes on the Circle and the Sphere," The Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol. 9, no. 3, July 1975, pp. 78-91.
Barzun, Jacques, "Art and Educational Inflation," Leonardo, Vol. 13, 1980, pp. 229-233.
Barzun, Jacques, "The Professions Under Siege," Harper's, Oct. 1978, pp. 61-68.
Bate, W. Jackson, "The Crisis in English Studies," Harvard Magazine, September and October, 1982, pp. 46-53.
Bateson, Gregory (interviewed by Daniel Goleman), "Breaking Out of the Double Bind," Psychology Today, Aug. 1978, pp. 43-51.
Bellow, Saul, "Literature in the Age of Technology."
Bellow, Saul, "The Nobel Lecture," The American Scholar, Vol. 46, no.3, Summer 1977, pp. 316-321.
9.02Bennett, William, "The Humanities, the Universities, and Public Policy," National Humanities Center, 1981, pp. 188-200.
Bleich, David, "The Subjective Paradigm in Science, Psychology, and Criticism," New Literary History, Winter 1976, pp. 313-346.
Bloom, Allan, "Our Listless Universities," National Review, December 12, 1982, pp. 1537-1548.
Bloomfield, Morton W. "Elitism in the Humanites," Daedulus, Fall 1974, pp. 128-137.
Bode, Carl, "The College Catalogue as a Work of Art," The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 115, 1983, pp. 64.
Boyer, Ernest L. and Martin Kaplan, "Education for Survival: A Call for a Core Curriculum," Change, March 1977, pp. 22-29.
Broudy, Harry S., "Science, Art and Human Values," The Science Teacher, March 1969, Washington, pp. 23-28.
Bruner, Jerome S., "The Conditions of Creativity," In On Knowing-Essays for the Left Hand, pp. 17-30.
Buchtel, Foster S., "Implications of Interdisciplinary Research Centers for University Policies and Practices," Journal of Research and Development in Education, Vol. 5, no. 4, Summer 1972.
Burchell, Helen R., "On Interdisciplinary Education," The High School Journal, Vol. LV, no. 2, Nov. 1971, pp. 78-85.
Burstyn, Harold L., "The Sciences and the Humanities."
Cadenhead, Kenneth, "Needed: A Plan that Capitalizes on Relationships Among Disciplines," Elementary Education, Nov. 1970, Vol. XLVII, pp. 988-992.
Cantor, Harold, "Reintegrating the Humanities," Change, Oct.1978, p. 54-55.
Carney, Marna K. and Frederick S. Carney, "The Economics and Ethics of Pollution Control: An Interdisciplinary Analysis," Soundings, pp. 271-187.
Carter, Byrum E., "Much Ado About Little? The Crisis in the Humanities," Change, March 178, pp. 35-37.
9.03Clecak, Peter, "Only a Tocqueville Need Apply," The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 27, 1977, pp. 32.
Cluck, Nancy Anne, "Reflections on the Interdisciplinary Approaches to the Humanites," Liberal Education, 1980.
Cockcroft, Sir John, "A Transatlantic View of What Knowledge is Worth Having," In Wayne C. Booth, ed. The Knowledge Most Worth Having, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1967.
Coles, Robert, "The Humanities and Human Dignity," Change, Feb. `78, pp. 9, 63.
Cone, Edward T., "One Hundred Metronomes," The American Scholar, Vol. 46, #4, Autumn '77, pp. 444-457.
Daiches, David, "The Scope of Sociological Criticism," Epoch, Summer 1950, Vol. III, pp. 57-64.
Darnton, Robert, "Intellectual and Cultural History," The Past Before Us, Michael Kammen, ed., Cornell University Press, N.Y., 1980, pp. 327-354.
Davenport, William H. "Some Contemporary Humanists' Perceptions of Science: A Survey," Harvard University, Newsletter #5 of the Program on Public Conceptions of Science, October 1973, pp. 16-29.
Davis, Lee, "Initiating the Humanities in an Age of Specialization: Some Specific Problems."
Douglas, John H., "The Cultures-Twenty Years Later," Science News, Vol. III, Feb. 1977.
Dubos, Rene, "The Despairing Optimist," The American Scholar, no date. (Note: This essay was presented as the Phi Beta Kapa oration at Harvard, June 6, 1978.)
Dubos, Rene. "The Hidden Aspects of Reality." In Rene Dubos, A God Within, pp. 3-15.
Dubos, Rene. "The Willed Future." In Reason Awake - Science of Man, Columbia University Press, 1970, pp. 228-260.
Dubos, Rene. "Worlds Within A World." In Rene Dubos, A God Within, pp. 17-2.
Elbow, Peter, "Real Learning and Nondisciplinary Courses," The Journal of General Education, Vol. XXIII, no. 2, pp. 111-141.
9.04Eliade, Mirces, "The Myths of the Modern World," in Myths, Dreams and Mysteries, New York: Harper, 1960, pp. 23-38.
Ellman, Neil, "The Two Cultures: Exploring and Bridging the Gap," English Journal, Vol. 65, no. 7, Oct. 1976, pp. 55-56.
Ellul, Jacques, "The Technological Order," Reprinted in Carl Mitcham & Robert Mackey, ed. Philosophy and Technology, New York: The Free Press, 1972, pp. 86-108.
Embry, Charles R. "Love, Death and Liberal Education," Liberal Education, Oct. 1976, pp. 444-456.
Epstein, Joseph, "A Conspiracy of Silence," Harper's, Nov. '77, pp. 77-92.
Erikson, Erik H. "Einstein's Puzzles," In Toys and Reasons: Stages in the Ritualization of Experience, W.W. Norton, no date, pp. 139-145.
Eurich, Alvin C. "Ideas - The Key to Interdisciplinary Studies," Learning Today, Vol. 5, no. 4, Fall 1972, pp. 45-53.
Fagan, Edward, "Interdisciplinary Bonding," English Journal, October 1976, Vol. 65, #7, pp. 31-34.
Fagan, Edward, "Science and English: A Rapprochement Through Literature."
Ferguson, Eugene, "The Mind's Eye: Nonverbal Thought in Technology," Science, 197 (26 August 1977): 827-836.
Florman, Samuel C. "In Praise of Technology," Harpers, Nov. 1975.
Flusser, Vilem, "Line and Surface," Main Currents in Modern Thought, Jan.-Feb. 1973, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 100-106.
Frankel, Charles, "Why the Humanites?, The Humanist as Citizen, Nat'l Humanites Center, 1981, pp. 3-15.
Frankel, Charles. "The Academy Enshrouded." Change, Dec. '77 pp. 24-29, 64.
Frey, Gerald, "Methodological Problems of Interdisciplinary Discussions," Ratio, 15 (1973): pp. 161-182.
Frye, Northrop, "Presidential Address," MLA. 1976.
9.05Frye, Northrop, "Where Metaphors and Equations Meet: a Convergence of the Arts and Sciences," The Chronicle of Higher Education, April 1913 pp. 64.
Frye, Roland Mushat, "Metaphors, Equations, and the Faith," Theology Today, pp. 59-67.
Furlong, William Barry, "The Flow Experience: The Fun in Fun," Psychology Today, June 1976, pp. 35-38, 80.
Gazzaniga, Michael, "The Split Brain in Man," Scientific American, Aug. '67.
Gross, Theodore L. "How to Kill a College: The Private Papers of a College Dean," Saturday Review, Feb. 1978.
Gusdorf, Georges, "Past, Present and Future in Interdisciplinary Research," International Social Science Journal, Vol 29, #4, pp. 580-600, 1977.
Gustafson, James, "Theology Confronts Technology and the Life Sciences." Commonweal, 16 June 19778, pp. 386-392.
Hassan, Ihab, "A Re-Vision of Literature," New Literary History, Autumn 1976.
Hentig, Hatmut, "Interdisziplinaritat, Wissenschaftsdidaktik, Wissenschaftspropadeutik," Merkur, Sept. 1971.
Higgins, Dick, "The New Humanism," Performing Arts, Vol. IV, 1979, pp. 23-32.
Hill, Martin, "A Nontraditional External Degree," Change, Vol. 10, #3, March '78.
Holton, Gerald, "Physics and Culture: Criteria for Curriculum Design," Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought, 1973, Harvard University Press, pp. 641-484.
Hurn, Christopher J., "The Reemergence of Liberal Education," Change, Oct. '78, pp. 8-9.
Jaumotte, Andre, "On Conditions for Creativity and Innovation," Leonardo, Vol. 9, pp. 315-319, Pergamon Press, Winter 1976, #1.
Johnson, William C., Jr., "Literature, Film, and the Evolution of Consciousness," Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Fall, 1979.
9.06
Jonas, Hans, "Seventeenth Century and After: The Meaning of the Scientific and Technological Revolution," in Philosophical Essays: From Ancient Creed to Technological Man, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1974, pp. 45-80.
Kass, Leon R., "Regarding the end of medicine and the pursuit of health," The Public Interest, no. 40, Summer 1975, pp. 11-42.
Kernan, Alvin, "The Image of Wholeness." The Chronicle of Higher Education, November 28, 1977, pp. 32.
Kikuchi, Makoto, "Creativity and Ways of Thinking: The Japanese Style," Physics Today, September 1981, pp. 42-51.
Kolb, David A., "Management and the Learning Process," California Management Review, Vol. XVIII, #3, Spring 1976.
Kurlansky, Mark J. "Pop Goes the Culture," Change, June '77, pp. 36-39.
Laws, Kenneth. "Physics and Dance," American Scientist. Vol. 73. September-October. 1985. 426-431.
Layton, Edwin, "Technology as Knowledge," Technology and Culture, 15 (1974): 31-41.
Lenz, Elinor, "The Humanities Go Public," Change, Feb. '76, pp. 52-71.
Lerner, Max, "On Being a Possibilist," Newsweek, Oct. 8, 1979.
Levi, Albert William, "The Uses of the Humanities in Personal Life," The Journal of Aesthetic Education, Jan. 1976, Vol. 10,no. 1.
Lewin, Leonard C. "Bioethical Questions," Harper's, September 1976, Vol. 253, No. 1516, pp. 33-40.
Megada, Virginia and Michael Moore, "The Humanities Cluster College at Bowling Green State University: Its Middle Years."
Maruyama, Magoroh, "The Post-Industrial Logic," In The Next 25 Years: Crisis & Opportunity, ed. Andrew A. Spekke, World Future Society, Washington, D.C., 1975.
McDermott, John, "Technology: The Opiate of the Intellectuals," Reprinted in Albert Teich, ed., Technology and Man's Future, 3rd ed. New York, St. Martin's Press, 1981, pp. 130-163.
9.07McGrath, Earl J. "Interdisciplinary Studies: An Integration of Knowledge and Experience," Change: Report on Teaching #6, no date.
McMorris, M.N. "Time and Reality in Eliot and Einstein," Main Currents in Modern Thought, Jan.-Feb. 1973, Vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 91-99.
Milton, Ohmer, "Interdisciplinary Approach," Ohmer Milton, Alternatives to the Tradition, Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, 1972, pp. 90-115.
Mitcham, Carl and Robert Mackey, "Bibliography of the Philosophy of Technology," Special Issue of Technology and Culture, 14 part II, April 1973. Also hardback book.
Morgan, George W. "Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Research and Human Studies," Internationales Jarbuch fur Interdisziplinare Forschung.
Muller, Steven, "A New American University?" Daedalus, Vol. 107, no. 1, Winter 1978, pp. 31-45.
Murchland, Bernard, "The Eclipse of the Liberal Arts," Change, Nov. '76, pp. 22-62.
Nabokov, Vladimir, "The Art of Translation," The New Republic, August 4, 1941, pp. 160-162.
Nelson, Robert J., "Culture and Culture: An Integrated, Multidisciplinary Approach to Foreign Language Requirements," The Modern Language Journal, Jan. 1972, Vol. LVI, no. 1, pp. 210-217.
Novak, Michael, "The One and the Many," Daedalus: Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Science, Vol. 2, pp. 203-211.
O'Connell, Barry, "Where Does Harvard Lead Us?" Change, Sept. '78, pp. 35-61.
Ortega y Gasset, Jose, "Culture and Science," Mission of the University, trans and ed. by Howard Lee Nostrand, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, pp. 69-81.
Overholt, T. W. and A.P. Schenk, "Violence and Human Values: The Implications of an Interdisciplinary Seminar for Curriculum Revision." The Journal of General Education. Volume XXI, Nr. 2, July 1969.
Paz, Octavio,"Use and Contemplation." In Praise of Hands: Contemporary Crafts of the World. Ed. The World Crafts Council. New York Graphic Society, 1974.
9.08Pelligrino, Edmund D., "Humanism in Human Experimentation: Some Notes of the Investigator's Fiduciary Role," Texas Reports on Biology and Medicine, Vol. 32, no. 1, Spring 1974, pp. 311-325.
Petrie, Hugh G., "Do You See What I See? The Epistemology of Interdisciplinary Inquiry," The Journal of Aesthetic Education, Jan. 1976, Vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 29-43. (3 copies available)
Phillips,Kevin, "The Balkanization of America," Harper's, May '78, pp. 37-47.
Poznar, Walter, "The Survival of the Humanities," Liberal Education, March 1977, pp. 19-24.
Praz, Mario, "Spatial and Temporal Interpenetration," In Mnemosyne: The Parallel Between Literature and the Visual Arts, Princeton University, 1970, pp. 191-216. (From A.W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts.)
Pring, Richard, "Curriculum Integration," In The Philosophy of Education, ed. R.S. Peters, Oxford University Press, 1973, pp. 123-149.
Rau, William C., "The Tacit Conventions of the Modernity School: An Analysis of Key Assumptions," American Sociological Review, Vol. 45, #2, April 1980, pp, 244-260.
Richards, M.C., "Centering as Dialogue," In Centering in Pottery, Poetry and the Person, Wesleyan University Press, Middletown, Conn., 1962, 1964, pp. 9-31.
Romey, William D., "Transdisciplinary, Problem-Centered Studies: Who Is The Integrator?" School Science and Mathematics, Kalamazoo, Michigan, pp. 30-38.
Royal Bank of Canada, Monthly Letter - "Discovering the Future," Vol. 59, No. 2, February 1978.
Royce, Joseph R., "The Unencapsulated Man," In The Encapsulated Man An Interdisciplinary Essay on the Search for Meaning, Princeton, D. Van Nostrand Col, Inc., 1964, pp. 165-201.
Safan-Gerard, Desy, "How to Unblock," Psychology Today, Jan. '78, pp. 80-86.
Sawhill, John C., "The Unlettered University," Harper's, Feb. '79, pp. 35-40. (2 copies available).
Schaefer, William D., "Still Crazy After All These Years," Modern Language Association. Profession 1978. 1-8.
9.09
Sherif, Muzafer and Carolyn W. Sherif, "Interdisciplinary Coordination as a Validity Check: Retrospect and Prospects," in Muzafer Sherif And Carolyn W. Sherif, ed. Interdisciplinary Relationships in the Social Sciences, Pennsylvania State University, no date given.
Shibles, Warren, "The Metaphorical Method," Journal of Aesthetic Education.
Shriver, Donald, "Man and His Machines: Four Angles of Vision," Technology and Culture, 13 (19972) 531-555.
Simpson, Elizabeth Leonie, "The Growth of Confluent Education," Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, Fall 1976, pp. 9-13.
Sinsheimer, Robert L., "Humanism and Science," Leonardo, Vol. 10, pp. 59-62, Pergamon Press, Winter 1977, #1.
Sontag, Susan, "Against Interpretation." Against Interpretation and Other Essays, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1966.
Sontag, Susan, "Against Interpretation." Against Interpretation and Other Essays. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1966.
Swora, Tamara and James L. Morrison, "Interdisciplinarity and Higher Education." The Journal of General Education. volume XXVI. Nr.l. April 1974.
Thevenaz, Pierre, "Presence of the Past," Trans. by Peter Carpenter, pp. 1-21.
Tookey, Mary Edna, "Developing Creative Thinking Through an Interdisciplinary Curriculum," Journal of Creative Behavior, volume 9, no. 1, pp. 267-276.
Trombley, William, "The Human Dimension of History," Change, 1976, pp. 37-40.
Wagner, Jon, "Anthropology and Human Values in Liberal Arts Education," Anthropology and Humanism Quarterly, Vol. 3, #3, Sept. 1978.
Wilson, William S., III, "Art: Energy and Attention," In The New Art, ed. Gergory Battock, pp. 246-253.
Winter, David G., Abigail J. Stewart, and David C. McClelland, No title - long heading "As old as Plato, as new as Harvard's new core curriculum plan, is the assumption that a liberal arts education makes us think more clearly, act more wisely. But does it really, etc." Psychology Today, Sept. '78, pp. 69-109.
9.10Wolfe, Tom, "The Intelligent Co-Ed's Guide to America," Harper's, July 1976, pp. 27-34.
Zaner, Richard M. "The Unanchored Leaf: Humanities and the Discipline of Care," Texas Reports on Biology and Medicine, Vol. 32, no. 1, spring 1974, ppl. 1-18.
Zaner, Richard M. "The Leap of Freedom: Education and the Possible," Main Currents in Modern Thought, Vol. 28, No. 5, May-June 1972.
"The Role of the Artist in Today's Society," Art Journal, XXXIV/4, Summer 1975, pp. 327-331. (Includes statements from Carl Andre, Hans Haacke, Cindy Nemser, John Perereault).
Interdisciplinary Articles: Addendum
Robert P. Armstrong. Publishing and the Humanities. Book Forum, Vol. II. No. 4, 1976.
Paul Gagnon. Why Study History? The Atlantic Monthly. November, 1988.
Edward T. Hall. The Translator: An Essay by Gary Blonston. Science. 1985, July/August.
Eugene Kennedy. A Dissenting Voice. Catholic Theologian David Tracy. The New York Times. Nov. 9, 1986/Section 6. Edith Kern. Resolved: That the Proper Study of Mankind is Man. PMLA, Vol. 93, No.3, May 1978.
Robert Scott Root-Berstein. On Paradigms and Revolutions in Science and Art: The Challenge of Interpretation. Art Journal. Summer 1984.
Mark Silk. The Hot History Department. Princeton's influential faculty. The New York Times Magazine. April 19, 1987.
"Metaphor and Meaning." Focus of English Journal. December, 1988.
10.01Multimedia and Computer
Ambrose, David W. "The Effects of Hypermedia on Learning: A Literature Review." Educational Technology. Volume XXXI, Number 12December, 1991.
Arnheim, Rudolf. Art and Visual Perception. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1954.
Arnheim, Rudolf. Visual Thinking. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969.
Arnheim, Rudolf. The Power of the Center: A Study of Composition in the Visual Arts. The New Version. University of California Press. Berkeley. 1988.
Arnheim, Rudolf. "Thoughts on Art Education." Occasional Paper 2. The Getty Center for Education in the Arts. 1989.
Barrett, Edward, ed. Text, Context and Hypertext. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988.
Barrett, Edward, ed. The Society of Text: Hypertext, Hypermedia, and the Social Construction of Information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989.
Barrett, Edward, ed. Sociomedia: Multimedia, Hypermedia, and the Social Construction of Knowledge. The MIT Press, Cambridge. 1992.
Berk, E. and J. Devlin, eds. The Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.
Bolter, Jay David. Turing's Man: Western Culture in the Computer Age. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984.
Bolter, J. David. Writing Space: The Computer, Hypertext and the History of Writing. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1990.
Brand, Stewart. The Media Lab: Inventing the Future at MIT. New York: Viking Penguin, 1987.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: The Experience of Play in Work and Games. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975.
Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Rick E. Robinson. The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic Encounter. A joint publication of the J. Paul Getty Museum and the Getty Center for Education in the Arts. 1990.
10.02Delany, Paul and George Landow, eds. Hypermedia and Literary Studies. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press, 1991.
Gardner, Howard. Art, Mind, and Brain a Cognitive Approach to Creativity. New York: Basic Books, 1982.
Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books, 1983.
Gardner, Howard. The Mind's New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution. New York: Basic Books, 1985.
Gumpert, Gary and Robert Cathcard, eds. Intermedia: Interpersonal Communication in a Media World, 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Horn, Robert E. Mapping Hypertext: The Analysis, Organization, and Display of Knowledge for the Next Generation of On-Line Text and Graphics. Lexington, MA: The Lexington Institute, 1989.
Jonassen, David H. and Heinz Mandl, eds. Designing Hypermedia for Learning. Berlin: Spring-Verlag, 1990.
Knee, Michael and Atkinson, Steven D. Hypertext/Hypermedia: an annotated bibliography. New York: Greenwood Press, 1990.
Landow, George P. and Delany, P., eds. Hypermedia and Literary Studies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991.
Landow, George P. Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.
Laurel, Brenda. Computers as Theatre, Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley, 1991.
Levinson, Paul. Mind at Large: Knowing in the Technological Age. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1988.
Mason, Robin and Tony Kaye, ed. Mindweave: Communication, Computers and Distance Education. London: Pergamon, 1989.
McAleese, Ray, ed. Hypertext: Theory into Practice. Oxford: Intellect, 1989.
McAleese, Ray and Catherine Green, eds. Hypertext: State of the Art. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp, 1990.
10.03McKnight, Cliff, Andrew Dillon and John Richardson. Hypertext in Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Minsky, Marvin. The Society of Mind. Simon & Schuster, 1985.
Nielsen, Jakob."Appendix B: Annotated Bibliography." in Hypertext and Hypermedia. Boston: Academic Press, 1990.
Nielsen, Jakob. Hypertext and Hypermedia. Boston: Academic Press, 1990.
Seyer, Philip. Understanding Hypertext: Understanding Hypertext: Concepts and Applications. New York: Windcrest, 1991.
Simpson, Rosemary, ed. Hypertext: A Comprehensive Index. Boston: BCS [Boston Computer Society] Hypermedia Resource Group, 1988.
Sinatra, Richard. Visual Literacy Connections to Thinking, Reading, and Writing. Springfield, Ill., 1986.
Tufte, Edward R. Envisioning Information. Chesire, CT: Graphics Press, 1990.
DISSERTATIONS
Sloan, Sharon. Pathways to Interpretation: Translation and Hypermedia. The University of Texas at Dallas. 1995.
11.01Contemporary Arts
Adorno, Theodor W. Philosophy of Modern Music, Seabury Press, 1980.
Alexandrian, Sarane. Surrealist Art, Praieger, 1969.
Apollonio, Umbro, ed. Futurist Manifestos, Thames & Hudson, 1973.
Arnason, H. H. History of Modern Art Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1968.
Arnheim, Rudolf. Visual Thinking, Berkeley, London, 1969.
Artaud, Antonin. The Theatre and its Double.
Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis.
Austin, William W. Music in the 20th Century.
Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space.
Bann, Stephen, ed. The Tradition of Constructivism (The Documents of 20th-Century), Viking, 1974. Others in the Series which could be useful: Apollinaire on Art, Picasso on Art, the Function of Painting by Leger, The Futurist Manifestos, The Blaue Reiter Almanac, Rhythmic Color and Simultaneity-Sonia & Robert Delaunay, An Anthology of Surrealism, the New Art/The New Life: The Complete Writings of Piet Mondrian, the Complete Writings of Kandinsky.
Barr, Alfred Jr. Picasso: Fifty Years of His Art, MOMA, 1946.
Barr, Alfred. Fantastic Art, Dada, Surrealism, MOMA, 1947.
Barr, Alfred. Matisse, His Art and His Public, MOMA 1974.
Barrett, Cyril. An Introduction to Optical Art, Studio Vista, 1971.
Barron, Stephanie & Tuchman, Maurice. The Avant-Garde in Russian, New Perspectives, LA County Museum/MIT, 1980.
Barzun, Jacques. The Use and Abuse of Art.
Battcock, Gregory, ed. Minimal Art, A Critical Anthology, Dutton, 1968.
Battcock, Gregory, ed. Idea Art, A Critique, Dutton, 1973.
11.02Baxandall, Lee, ed. Radical Perspectives in the Arts, Pelican, 1972.
Bayer, Herbert, Gropius, Walter, eds. Bauhaus 1919-1928, London, 1959.
Bowlt, John, ed. Russian Art of the Avant-Garde: Theory and Criticism, 1902-1934
Bradbury, Malcolm and McFarlane, James (eds.) Modernism 1890-1930. London: Penguin Books, 1978.
Bret, Guy. Kinetic Art, The Language of Movement, Studio-Vista, 1968.
Breton, André. Surrealism and Painting.
Brook, Peter. The Empty Space.
Brustein, Robert. The Theatre of Revolt, New York, 1964.
Burnham, Jack. Beyond Modern Sculpture: The Effects of Science and Technology on the Sculpture of This Century, New York, 1968.
Calinescu, Matei. Faces of Modernity, Indiana, 1977. (Avant-garde/Decadence/Kitsch)
Canaday, John: Mainstreams of Modern Art, New York, 1959.
Cassou, Jean. Art and Confrontation, N.Y.G.S. 1968.
Chipp, Herschel B. (ed.) Theories of Modern Art. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1968.
Clark, Kenneth. The Nude: A Study in Ideal Form, vol. 2, Princeton, N.J., 1972.
Clay, Jean. Modern Art.
Copland, Aaron. What to Listen for in Music.
Copland, Aaron. The New Music, 1900-1960, Norton, 1968.
Copland, Aaron. Music and the Imagination, Cambridge, Mass., 1953.
Costakis, George. The George Costakis Collection: Russian Avant-Garde Art, Abrams, 1981. (Useful for new data on large number of unknown artists in the West.)
Davis, Douglas, Art and the Future/A History/Prophecy of the Collaboration Between Science, Technology and Art.
11.03Dube, Wolf-Dieter. The Expressionists, Thames & Hudson, 1972.
Dunlap, Ian. The Shock of the New. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1972. New York: American Heritage Press, 1972.
Duthuit, Georges. The Fauvist Painters, N.Y. Wittenborn, 1950.
Eliot, T. S. On Poetry and Poets, New York, 1957.
Elliott, David. Rodchenko and the Arts of Revolutionary Russia, Pantheon, 1970.
Ellman, R. and Feidelson, C. (eds.) The Modern Tradition.
Esslin, Martin. The Theatre of the Absurd, rev. and updated ed., New York, 1973.
Fleming, William. Arts and Ideas: New Brief Edition, 1974.
Forge, Andrew. Robert Rauschenberg, Abrams, 1972
Frampton, Kenneth. Modern Architecture, A Critical History, Oxford, 1980.
Friedman, Mildren, ed. De Stijl: 1917-1931, Vision of Utopia, Walker Art Center, Minn. 1982. (The best book on the subject.)
Fussell, Paul. The Great War and Modern Memory. London & New York: Oxford University Press, 1975.
Gardner, Joseph L., gen. ed. World of Culture. Newsweek Books, New York, 1974-1978. Separate vols. on dance, music, theatre, painting, architecture, the novel, opera, and poetry.
Geelhaar, Christian. Paul Klee and the Bauhaus, N.Y.G.S. 1973.
Golding, John. Cubism: A History and an Analysis, 1907-14, Wittenborn, 1959.
Goodman, Nelson. Languages of Art, New York, 1968.
Gottlieb, Carla. Beyond Modern Art, Dutton, 1976.
Green, Christopher. Leger and the Avant-Garde, Yale, 1976.
Grey, Camilla. The Great Experiment: Russian Art, 1863-1922, McGraw-Hill, 1963.
Griffiths, Paul. Modern Music, The Avant-Garde since 1945, Braziller, 1981. (Balanced, heavy concentration on experimental music; for music students.)
11.04Griffiths, Paul. A Concise History of Avant-Garde Music/From Debussy to Boulez, Oxford, 1978.
Haftmann, Werner. Painting in the Twentieth Century, vol. 1. An Analysis of the Artists and Their Works; vol. 2: A Pictorial Survey, New York, 1973.
Hall, James B. & Ulanov, Barry. (eds.) Modern Culture and the Arts.
Henri, Adrian. Total Art, Environments, Happenings and Performance, Oxford, 1974.
Hobbs, R.C. and Levin, Gail. Abstract Expressionism: The Formative Years. New York: Whitney Museum, 1978.
Hodin, J.P. Modern Art and the Modern Mind, Western Reserve Univ., 1972. (A philosophical, psychological approach/also art-religion/art-society/art/science)
Howe, Irwin. The Idea of the Modern in Literature and the Arts, 1967.
Huizinga, J. Homo Ludens.
Hunter, Sam. American Art of the 20th Century, New York, 1974.
Hughes, Robert. The Shock of the New, Knopf, 1981.
Jaspers, Karl. Man in the Modern Age.
Johnson, Ellen H. Modern Art and the Object, Harper & Row, 1976.
Kepes, G. The New Landscape in Art and Science.
Kirby, E.T., ed. Total Theatre: A Critical Anthology, New York, 1969.
Kirby, Michael. Art of Time.
Kirby, Michael. Futurist Performance, Dutton, 1971.
Knobler, Nathan. The Visual Dialogue: An Introduction to the Appreciation of Art, New York, 1967.
Kozloff, Max. Cubism/Futurism, Charterhouse, 1973.
Kozloff, Max. Jasper Johns, Abrams, 1968.
11.05Kramer, Hilton. The Age of the Avant-Garde. New York: Farrar, Straus, 1973.
Kraus, Rosalind. Passages in Modern Sculpture, MIT, 1981.
Kultermann, Udo. New Realism, N.Y.G.S., 1972.
Langer, Susanne K. Feeling and Form, New York, 1956.
Langer, Susanne K. Philosophy in a New Key, 3rd ed., Baltimore, 1957.
Langer, Susanne K. Problems of Art: Ten Philosophical Lectures, New York, 1957.
Le Corbusier. The City of Tomorrow. London: Architect Press, 1971. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1971.
Lippard, Lucy. Pop Art. London: Thames & Hudson, 1967. New York: Oxford University Press, 1966; Praeger, 1969.
Lucie-Smith, Edward. Late Modern/The Visual Arts Since 1945, Oxford, 1975.
Matthews, J.H. The Imagery of Surrealism.
Meyer, Leonard. Music, The Arts, and Ideas, Pattern and Predictions in Twentieth-Century Culture, Chicago Univ. Press. 1967.
Moholoy-Nagy. The New Vision: Vision in Movement.
Nyman, Michael. Experimental Music, Cage and Beyond, Schirmer, 1974. (Esoteric, only for advanced students)
Osborne, Harold. Abstraction and Artifice in Twentieth-Century Art. (Careful analyses of the process of abstraction in 20th- century art, from Cezanne to the art of the Sixties)
Panofsky, Erwin. Meaning in the Visual Arts, New York (1955), 1974.
Pleasants, Henry. Serious Music and All That Jazz, Simon, 1969.
Pleasants, Henry. The Agony of Modern Music, Simon, 1955.
Poggioli, Renato. The Theory of the Avant-Garde, Harvard, 1968-81.
Pronko, Leonard Cabell. Avant-Garde: The Experimental Theatre in France, Berkeley, CA, 1962.
11.06Preminger, Alex. The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, rev. ed., Princeton, N.J., 1975.
Rader, Melvin. A Modern Book of Aesthetics: An Anthology, 4th ed., New York, 1973.
Read, Sir Herbert. The Meaning of Art, Baltimore, 1964.
Read, Herbert. A Concise History of Modern Painting, New York (1959), 1964.
Rose, Barbara (ed.) American Art since 1900: A Critical History. Rev. ed. London: Thames & Hudson, 1975. New York: Praeger, 1975.
Rosenberg, Harold. Discovering the Present: Three Decades in Art, Culture, and Politics. Chicago & London: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1973.
Rosenberg, Harold. The De-Definition of Art: Action Art to Pop to Earthworks. London: Secker & Warburg, 1972. New York: Horizon Press, 1972.
Rosenberg, Harold. The Anxious Object: Art Today and Its Audience, New York, 1964.
Rubin, William S. Dada, Surrealism and Their Heritage, MOMA, 1967.
Russell, John. The Meanings of Modern Art, Harper, 1981.
Salazar, Adolfo. Music in Our Time: Trends in Music Since the Romantic Era, tr. Isabel Pope, New York, 1946.
Salzman, Eric. Twentieth-Century Music: An Introduction, Englewood Cliffs, 1967.
Shattuck, Roger. The Banquet Years: The Origins of the Avant Garde in France, 1885 to World War I. Rev. ed. London: Cape, 1969. New York: Random House, 1968.
Sontag, Susan. Against Interpretation and Other Essays, New York, 1966.
Stangos, Nokos. ed. Concepts of Modern Art (second ed.), 1981.
Steinberg, Leo. Other Criteria: Confrontations with Twentieth Century Art. New York & London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1972.
Stuckenschmidt, H.H. Twentieth Century Music, New York, 1973.
Weightman, John. The Concept of the Avant-Garde, Explorations in Modernism, 1973. (General Theory/Theatre & Cinema/Literature.)
12.01Music
Elliott Antokoletz. Twentieth Century Music. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall. 1992. 546p.
William W. Austin. Music in the 20th Century: From Debussy through Stravinsky. New York. W.W. Norton. 1966. 708 pages.
Leonard Bernstein. The Unanswered Question: Six Talks at Harvard. Harvard University Press. 1976.
Reginal Smith Brindle. The New Music. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press. 1987.
Aaron Copland. Music and Imagination. Harvard University Press. 1952.
John C. Crawford. Expressionism in Twentieth-Century Music. Bloomington. Indiana University Press. 1993. 331p.
Lawrence Davies. Paths of Modern Music: Aspects of Music from Wagner to the Present Day. New York. Scribners.
Paul Griffiths. A Concise History of Avant-Garde Music: From Debussy to Boulez. New York. Oxford University Press. 1978. 216 pages.
Paul Griffiths. Modern Music: the avant garde since 1945. New York. George Braziller. 1981. 330 pages.
Wiley H. Hitchcock. Music in the United States: A Historical Introduction to Twentieth-Century Music. N.Y. Alfred A. Knopf. 1989. 632p.
Roger Kamien. Music: An Appreciation. New York. McGraw Hill Book Company. 1976. 1980. 1984. 600 pages.
Joseph Kerman. Listen. New York. Worth Publishers. 1972. 392 pages.
Robert P. Morgan. Twentieth-Century Music: A History of Musical Style Modern Europe and America. The Norton Introduction to Music History. N.Y. Norton. 1991. 554p.
Eric Salzman. Twentieth-Century Music: An Introduction. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall. 1988. 330p.
Elliott Schwartz & Daniel Godfrey. Music Since 1945: Issues, Materials and Literature. N.Y. Schirmer Books. 1992. 537p.
12.02Bryan R. Simms. Music of the Twentieth Century: Style and Structure. New York. Schirmer Books. 1986. 450p.
Joseph Nathan Straus. Remaking the Past: Musical Modernism and the Influence of the Tonal Tradition. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press. 1990. 207p.
Igor Stravinsky. Poetics of Music. (In the Form of Six Lessons). Preface by George Seferis. Harvard University Press. 1942. 1947. 1970. 142 pages.
H. H. Stuckenschmidt. Twentieth Century Music. New York. McGraw Hill Book Company. 1969. 256 pages.
Glenn Watkins. Soundings: Music in the Twentieth Century. New York. Schirmer Books. 1988. 690p.
Glenn Watkins. Pyramids at the Louvre: Music, Culture, and Collage from Stravinsky to the Postmodernists. Cambridge, Mass. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 1994. 571p.
Paul Henry Lang. Problems of Modern Music. Norton. 1962
George Perle. Serial Composition and Atonality. University of California Press. 1962.
Lawrence Davies. Paths of Modern Music: Aspects of Music from Wagner to the Present Day. Scribners.
Hans Vogt. Neue Musik seit 1945. Reclam Verlag.
David Ewen. Composers of Tomorrow's Music. Dodd, Mead.
Percy A. Scholes. The Oxford Companion to Music.
La Revue d' Esthetique published a special number dedicated to Musiques Nouvelles. Date was not on the newspaper review. It might have been quite some time ago. In that special issue is an essay by Gisele Brelet entitled "L'esthetique du discontinu dans la musique nouvelle."Allen Forte. The Structure of Atonal Music. Yale University Press.
Leonard Stein. Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg. With translations by Leo Black. St. Martin's
12.03Charles Rosen. Arnold Schoenberg. Viking. (Modern Masters Series)
John Gruen. Menotte: A Biography. New York. Macmillan. Illustrated, 242 pages.
Oliver Strunk. Essays on Music in the Western World. Norton. 200 pages.
William W. Austin. Music in the 20th Century: From Debussy through Stravinsky. New York. W.W. Norton. 1966. 708 pages.
Aaron Copland. Music and Imagination. Harvard University Press. 1952.
Paul Griffiths. A Concise History of Avant-Garde Music: From Debussy to Boulez. New York. Oxford University press. 1978. 216 pages.
Joseph Kerman. Listen. New York. Worth Publishers. 1972. 392 pages.
Igor Stravinsky. Poetics of Music. (In the Form of Six Lessons). Preface by George Seferis. Harvard University Press. 1942. 1947. 1970. 142 pages.
H. H. Stuckenschmidt. Twentieth Century Music. New York. McGraw Hill Book Company. 1969. 256 pages.
13.01Comparative Literature
Altick, Richard D. The Art of Literary Research. Third Edition. New York and London. W. W. Norton & Company. 1981, 1975, 1963.
Bassnett, Susan. Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. Oxford and Cambridge USA. Blackwell. 1993.
Clements, Robert J. Comparative Literature As Academic Discipline: A Statement of Principles, Praxis, Standards. New York. The Modern Language Association of America. 1978.
Collier, P. and H. Geyer-Ryan. Eds. Literary Theory Today.
Comparaison N'est Pas Raison. La Crise De La Littérature Comparée. Par Etiemble. Les Essais Cix. Nrf. Gallimard. 1963.
Compiled by the Faculty of Comparative Literature, The Graduate School, Rutgers University. A Syllabus of Comparative Literature. New York and London. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 1964.
Corstius, Jan Brandt. Introduction to the Comparative Study of Literature. New York. Random House. 1968.
R. Con Davis and R. Schleifer. Contemporary Literary Criticism.
Robert Con Davis and Ronald Schleifer. Criticism & Culture: The Role of Critique in Modern Literary Theory.
Friederich, Werner P. and Malone, David, H. Outline of Comparative Literature from Dante Aligheiri to Eugene O'Neill. Chapel Hill. University of North Caroline Press. 1954.
Graff, Anthony G. Professing Literature: An Institutional History
Hawthorn, Jeremy. A Concise Glossary of Contemporary Literary Theory. London, New York, Melbourne, Auckland. Edward Arnold. 1992. Holman, C. Hugh and William Harmon. A Handbook To Literature. Sixth Edition. New York. MacMillan Publishing Company. London. Collier MacMillan Publishers. 1992.
Ingram, David. Critical Theory and Philosophy.
Ingram, David and J. Simon-Ingram. Critical Theory: The Essential Readings.
13.02Jost, Francis. Introduction to Comparative Literature. 1974.
Lawall, Sarah, Ed. Reading World Literature: Theory, History, Practice. Austin, TX. University of Texas Press. 1994.
Nichols, Stephen G., Jr. and Richard B. Vowles, Eds. Comparatists At Work: Studies in Comparative Literature. Waltham, Massachusetts, Toronto and London. Blaisdell Publishing Company. 1968.
Prawer, S. S. Comparative Literary Studies. New York. Barnes and Noble, 1973, pp. 170-172.
Stallknecht, Newton P. and Frenz, Horst. Comparative Literature: Method and Perspective. 1961 and 1971.
Trousson, R. un problème de littérature comparée: les études de thèmes. Paris. Letteres Modernes. 1965.
Warren, Austin and Wellek, René. Theory of Literature. San Diego, New York, London. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. 1975 and 1977.
Weisstein, Ulrich. Comparative Literature and Literary Theory. Bloomington, Indiana. Indiana University Press. 1973. pp. 265-299.
Weisstein, Ulrich. Einführung in die Vergleichende Literatur-wissenschaft. Stuttgart. Kohlhammer. 1968.
Wellek, René. A History of Modern Criticism, 1750-1950. New Haven. Yale University Press. 1955-66. (Four volumes)
14.01Historical Studies
Reading List
Ariès, P. Centuries of Childhood and Western Attitudes Toward Death.
Geoffrey Barraclough. Main Trends in History. Holmes and Meier. 1979.
Berkhofer, Robert. A Behavioral Approach to Historical Analysis.
Boulding, Kenneth. The Image.
Brown, N. O. Life Against Death.
Burke, Peter. Ed. New Perspectives on Historical Writing
Calhoun, Daniel. The Intelligence of a People.
Carr, E. H. The Twenty Years' Crisis.
Cassirer, E. Philosophy of the Enlightenment, The Problem of Knowledge: Philosophy, Science and History Since Hegel.
Collingwood, R. G. The Idea of History.
Darnton. "The history of mentalities," in Structure, Consciousness and History, ed. Richard Harvey Brown and Stanford M. Lyman. Cambridge University Press. 1978. 106-137.
Davis, Natalie Z. Society and Culture in Early Modern France.
Davis, David B. The Idea of Slavery in Western Culture,...The Age of Revolution.
Detzell, Charles, ed. The Future of History. Vanderbilt University Press. 1977.
Ferro, Marc. The Use and Abuse of History. Routledge and Kegan. 1984
Fiedler, Leslie. Love and Death in the American Novel.
Foucault. The Order of Things.
Geertz, C. The Interpretation of Cultures.
Felix Gilbert and Stephen Graubard, eds. Historical Studies Today. Norton. 1972.
14.02Hauser, Arnold. Social History of Art (four volumes).
Hazard, P. The European Mind.
Higham, John and Paul Conkin, eds. New Directions in American Intellectual History. Johns Hopkins University Press. 1979.
Higham, John. History: Professional Scholarship in America. Johns Hopkins University Press. 1983.
Hobsbawm, Eric and Terence Ranger, eds. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge University Press. 1983.
Hoffman, Frederick. The Twenties.
Holton, Gerald. Themetic Origins of Scientific Thought: Keplen to Einstein.
Hughes, H. Stuart. Consciousness and Society.
Huizinga, Johann. The Waning of the Middle Ages.
Hutton, Patrick. "The History of Mentalities: The New Map of Cultural History," History and Theory. 20. 1981. 237-259.
Iggers and Harold T. Parker, eds. International Handbook of Historical Studies. Greenwood Press. 1979.
Kammen, Michael, ed. The Past Before Us. Cornell University Press. 1980.
LaCapra, Dominick. History and Criticism. Cornell UP. 1985.
LaCapra, Dominick and Steven L. Kaplan, eds. Modern European Intellectual History. Cornell University Press. 1982
Dominick LaCapra. Rethinking Intellectual History. Cornell University Press.
Laslett, Peter. The World We Have Lost.
Lifton, Robert. History and Human Survival.
Lovejoy, Arthur. Essays in the History of Ideas The Great Chain of Being
Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia: Sociology of Knowledge.
14.03Marcus, Stephen. The Other Victorians.
Marx. Leo. The Machine in the Garden.
Masur, Gerhard. Prophets of Yesterday.
Matthiessen, F. O. American Renaissance.
Miller, Perry. Writings on the Puritans. The New England Mind: The 17th Century, The New England Mind: From Colony to Province, Errand into The Wilderness, and Nature's Nation.
Mitchell, W. J. T., ed. The Language of Images. University of Chicago Press. 1982.
Mitchell, W.J.T., ed. The Politics of Interpretation. University of Chicago Press. 1983.
Mumford, Lewis. Technics and Civilization.
Nisbet, Robert. Social Change and History.
Panofsky, Erwin. Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism.
Polanyi, Karl. The Great Transformation.
Piaget, Jean. Psychology and Epistemology.
Rabb, Theodore K. and Robert I. Rotberg, eds. The New History: 1980s and Beyond. Princeton University Press. 1982.
Schneideer, L. Idea of Culture in the Social Sciences.
Shapiro, Theda. Painters and Politics.
Stern, Fritz. The Politics of Cultural Despair.
Thomas, Keith. Religion and the Decline of Magic.
Walzer, Michael. The Revolution of the Saints.
White, Hayden. Tropics of Discourse. Johns Hopkins UP. 1978.
White, Lynn. Dynamo and Virgin Reconsidered.
White, Morton. Social Thought in America.
14.04Williams, R. Culture and Society: The Long Revolution
Keywords.
15.01Suggestions For Book Reports
Ackerman, Diane. A Natural History of the Senses. New York: Vintage Books, 1991.
Alter, Robert. The Pleasures of Reading in an Ideological Age. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1989.
Ashcraft, Norman and Albert E. Scheflen. People Space.
Baker, Paul. Integration of Abilities.
Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space. Trans. Maria Jolas. Boston: Beacon Press, 1969.
Barthes, Roland. Image Music Text.
Barrett, William. Time of Need. Middleton, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1972.
Barricelli & Gibaldi. Interrelations of Literature.
Becker, Ernest. The Denial of Death. New York: The Free Press, 1973.
Berger, John. Ways of Seeing. New York: Penguin Books, 1977.
Leonard Bernstein. The Unanswered Question.
Blanchot. The Space of Literature.
Harold Bloom. The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. Harcourt Brace and Company.
Boden, Margaret A. The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. Basic Books, Division of HarperCollins Publishers.
Bronowski. Science and Human Values.
Caillois, Roger. Man, Play and Games.
Capra, Fritjof. The Turning Point: Science. Society, and the Rising Culture. New York: Bantam Books, 1983.
Cassirer, Ernst. The Problem of Knowledge.
15.02Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Rick Robinson. The Art of Seeing: An Interpretation of the Aesthetic Encounter. J. Paul Getty Museum and the Getty Center for Education in the Arts. ISBN #0-89236-156-5 pbk
Davis, Douglas. Art and the Future. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1973, 1975.
Delany, Paul and George P. Landow, ed. Hypermedia and Literary Studies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1991.
Eco, Umberto. The Role of the Reader.
Foucault, Michel. The Order of Things.
French, Marylin. Beyond Power.
Gardner, Howard. Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity. Basic Books, division of HarperCollins Publishers.
Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books Inc., Publishers, 1985.
Gasset, José Ortega y. The Dehumanization of Art.
Gombrich, E.H. Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969, 1972.
Hall, Edward T. Beyond Culture. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1977.
Heisenberg, Werner. Physics and Philosophy.
Highwater, Jamake. The Primal Mind.
Hughes, Robert. Culture of Complaint: The Fraying of America. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955.
Hunt, Lynn, Editor. The New Cultural History. University of California Press. 1989.
Izer, Wolfgang. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980.
15.03Kockelmans, Joseph J., Editor. Interdisciplinarity and Higher Education. The Pennsylvania State University Press. 1979.
Kockelmans, Joseph, Ed. Interdisciplinarity and Higher Education.
Kaufmann, Walter. The Future of the Humanities.
Kayser, Wolfgang. The Grotesque in Art and Literature
Konner, Melvin. The Tangled Wing.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.
Landow, George P. Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.
Lovejoy, Arthur O. The Great Chain of Being.
Minsky, Marvin. The Science of Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986.
Nadler, Gerald and Shozo Hibino. Creative Solution Finding: The Triumph of Full-Spectrum Creativity Over Conventional Thinking. Prima Publishing. ISBN #1-55958-567-6
Prima PublishingPO Box 1260BKRocklin, CA 95677916-632-4400
Naisbitt, John. Megatrends.
Oleson, Alexandra and John Vos. Editors. The Organization of Knowledge in Modern America. Johns Hokpins University Press. 1979.
Pagels, Heinz. The Cosmic Code.
Paz, O. Convergences.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice.
Read, Herbert. Art and Society.
Schell, Jonathan. The Fate of the Earth.
15.04
Sontag, Susan. Against Interpretation and Other Essays. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1966.Snow, C. P. The Two Cultures.
Thomas, Lewis. The Lives of a Cell.
Toffler, Alvin. The Third Wave. New York: William Morrow and Company, 1980.
Tomkins, Calvin. The Bride and the Bachelor.
Tuchman, Barbara W. A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century. New York: Ballantine Books, 1978.
16.01Suggestions for Projects
Research ProjectsScholarly assessment of one interdisciplinary mind to be taken from the list of IS MINDS.
Book Review of a scholarly work in the arts and humanities.
Preparation of a bibliographical abstract of an article or a book in the area of interdisciplinary studies in the arts and humanities.
Or Annotated bibliography of audio-visual and computer material with respect to interdisciplinary orientation.
Or Annotated bibliography of an electronic or multimedia publication.
Preparation of an annotation, either of a book or a scholarly journal article. Final Project: To be handed in during the last week of November.
Topic should be chosen from one of the following project suggestions. It a student wishes to work on a project different from those listed below, he or she should discuss it with the instructor. Team work is encouraged.
Examine the changing approaches of interpretation demonstrated through a close analysis of at least five critical interpretations of the same verbal or non-verbal text over a period of thirty to fifty years.
Choose a literary text that has been translated by at least four different translators over a period of thirty to fifty years and determine the changes in interpretation as witnessed through the specific interpretive approach that each translator has taken.
Choose a visual object and prepare a collection of visual interpretations of that object (either through color xerox or slides) covering several centuries to the present day. Write a short evaluative essay that discusses how that particular object has been interpreted throughout the centuries and what changes in perception can be seen in the visual collection you have put together.
Choose a concept or a word and show how the semantic connotations of that word or concept have changed throughout the centuries. This project must be rooted in specific texts with a discussion of what directions of meaning a word or concept has taken on within the frame of that specific text. It is not enough to research the changing semantic connotations in a dictionary. The latter can help you to locate works in which a word or concept was used.
16.02Choose a particular "ism" in the twentieth century and explore that concept within at least two art forms.
Take a specific discipline and see whether you can define, describe and evaluate the particular language of that discipline.
An annotated presentation in written form of the major journals that publish important manuscripts relevant to interdisciplinary studies in the arts and humanities.
Choose one book of fiction, or poetry, or drama or a book of criticism and collect all the reviews of this book published in newspapers and scholarly journals after the appearance of the book. Evaluate those reviews and prepare your own review of the book.
Similarly a book of translation should be evaluated in the same manner. Collect reviews in newspapers and journals and write your own review of the book.
Select five books in the field of the arts and humanities and show what particular approach to the respective subject matters the authors of these books have implemented.
A study and evaluation of the Humanities Programs in the United States.
A study and documentation of the private, local, state and federal support of the arts and humanities in this country.
A comparative study and evaluation of several textbooks published in the field of the humanities.
An assessment and evaluation of dissertations done in the humanities during the last five years or decade.
A comparative study of the support for the arts and humanities between the United States and another country.
The humanities and the publishing world with particular emphasis on university presses. Survey the publications of university presses in recent years and assess their contribution to the field of the humanities and interdisciplinary studies.
The impact of technological innovations and inventions on research methods in the arts and humanities. Recent developments in computer technology have changed our methods of research. What kind of research projects can now be undertaken that would have taken years to implement with the traditional research tools?
16.03The funding of the humanities in our contemporary society. What private foundations and government agencies are currently supporting research in the humanities? Is there any support for research projects in the field of interdisciplinary studies?
Humanities Centers in the USA.What Humanities Centers are currently operative in the United States and what is
their scholarly and intellectual orientation?
Research libraries for the humanities in the USA Comparative study of a work in translation over several hundred years. Take a text that was written in a foreign language several hundred years ago. Follow that text through its translations into English from its first to the most recent translation. Determine how the perspective established by the translator reflects on the sensibility of his or her time.
Manifestoes of the 20th century How have the various manifestoes of the 20th century changed our approaches to the interpretation of literary and artistic texts?
Scholarly associations and societies and their function.
Writing a Grant Proposal for NEH (National Endowment for the Humanities) or NEA (National Endowment for the Arts)
The History of a Discipline
Interdisciplinary research in other countries.Investigate a subject matter by including foreign scholars who have written on the
subject in a foreign language. We frequently forget that scholars from other countries have also contributed substantial research to certain subject matters. Therefore, it would be appropriate to include criticism written in a foreign language to define the perspective that a scholar from another country brings to a particular subject matter.
Annotation and evaluation of a bibliography dealing with a particular subject matter. (e.g. an "ism" category).
Collection of interviews with interdisciplinary minds (artists, composers, directors etc). With introductory essay.
Transferral of literature via literary anthologies. What does get transplanted through the possibilities of anthologies? How have the selections in anthologies changed over the last twenty years with respect to the changing of canons?
16.04A collection of 5 to 10 essays that promote the idea of interdisciplinarity and contribute to intensifying scholarship in that area. A collection with a short introductory essay.
The language of translation criticism. An investigation into current practices of reviewing literary works in translation. Samples taken from newspapers, journals etc.
Critical investigation of a text from two different cultural perspectives. This would only be for students who have a fairly extensive reading knowledge of a foreign language.
A collection of contemporary short stories or poems with an introduction that presents a perspective on the material selected for such a collection.
Report on the particular direction of a university press and its contribution to interdisciplinary studies in the arts and humanities.
Assess the availability and the usefulness of multimedia material for the teaching of the humanities.
The impact of electronic publishing on research in the arts and humanities. Both electronic publishers and electronic journals.
Creative Projects: collection of poems, short stories, plays, translations etc. Your own work should be preceded by an elaborate essay in which you place yourself in the larger context of contemporary literary and artistic movements and in which you contemplate on the reconstruction of the creative process.
A collection of contemporary essays/articles in a particular area of concentration together with an elaborate introduction.
A collection of contemporary short stories or poems with an introduction that presents a perspective on the material selected for such a collection.
16.08
Book Report AbstractAnnotated bibliography of interdisciplinary articles or books. Annotated bibliography of audio-visual and computer material with respect to interdisciplinary orientation. Annotated bibliography of electronic and multimedia publishing.
17.01
FUTUROLOGY/FUTURISM
18.01MULTIPLE INTERPRETATIONS
Multiple Translations
Pablo Neruda“Arte Poética”Spanish textTrotTranslations By: Ben Belitt, Donald Walsh, Robert Bly, Angel Flores, Nathaniel Tarn
Rainer Maria Rilke“Der Panther”TrotTranslations By: John Felstiner, Robert Bly, James L. Dana, C.F. MacIntyre, M.D. Herter Norton, J.B. Leishman, Ludwig Lewisohn,Stephen Mitchell
Charles Baudelaire“Correspondances”French textTrot (Missing)Translators: Richard Howard, C.F. MacIntyre, Joanna Richardson,Arthur Symons, Richard Wilbur
Gaius Valerius CatallusCatallus V: “Vivamus, mea Lesbia”(To be prepared)
Dante AlighieriLa Divina Comedia: Inferno, Canto I“Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita”(To Be Prepared)
Music
J.S. BachItalian Concerto, I Movement
BeethovenSonata, Opus X, Number I, C minorSelections From Movements I-III
18.02Slides
Chairs(44 Slides)Title of slides to be transferred to computer.
Tree Slides (29 Slides with Titles)
PaintingMultiple Critical Interpretations of “Guernica”(To be organized and evaluated)
Human Figure (Photographic reproductions)
Multiple Intepretations of a Literary TextKafkaThe Trial
19.01Three Tracks
Aesthetic Studies
History of Ideas
Studies in Literature
20.01
Essays by Rainer Schulte on Translation and Interdisciplinary Studies
TRANSLATION AND READING
By Rainer Schulte
In moments when the established boundaries and guiding principles of literary criticism are being severely questioned as to their past and present validity, new avenues of research thinking must be pursued. The field of Translation Studies engages us in an important research area that will revitalize the study of the arts and humanities.
By its very nature, translation links theory with practice. Furthermore, Translation Studies bridges the gap between literary history, linguistics, semiotics, and aesthetics. The study of translation as well as the act of translation are always concerned with the reconstruction of a process rather than with the description of a particular content. Translation emphasizes the "how" and not the "what." What processes do I have to initiate to transfer a situation from a source language text into the new language? How did the author create a particular atmosphere in a poem or a fiction piece and what methodologies does the translator have to develop to transplant these atmospheres into another language? The reconstruction of processes demands the invention of methodologies, and the act of translation provides us with an opportunity to explore the possibilities of these methodologies.
Like critical interpretations, translation endeavors begin with the act of reading. Therefore, it is opportune to re-think the efforts that go into the act of reading and how the translation perspective modifies and directs our reading processes. Hans Georg Gadamer, in his work on "Wieweit schreibt Sprache das Denken vor?" ("To What Extent Does Language Prescribe Thinking?"), succinctly expresses the relationship between reading and translating in the following manner: "Lesen ist schon Übersetzen und Übersetzen ist dann noch einmal Übersetzen...Der Vorgang des Übersetzens schliesst im Grunde das ganze Geheimnis menschlicher Weltverständigung und gesellschaftlicher Kommunikation ein." ("Reading is already translation, and translation is translation for the second time...The process of translating comprises in its essence the whole secret of human understanding of the world and of social communication.")
Contrary to the critical inquiry of a text, which frequently assesses, describes, and evaluates the implications of content in a work, the translator/reader focuses his/her attention on the word and sentence as process, as possibilities toward meanings. The translator is also less likely to succumb to the impossibility of experiencing a literary work because the mechanisms of media have overloaded a work with too much information and publicity. A genuine experience of the Mona Lisa is perhaps no longer possible, since the ritual of viewing the painting has been degraded to the level of kitsch.
"Reading is already translation." Through the process of reading, we the readers are transplanted into the atmosphere of a new situation that does not build just one
clearly-defined reality, but, rather, possibilities of various realities. The reader is left with various options that he or she can interpret within the context of that atmosphere. The reader/translator reestablishes at every step of his or her work the inherent uncertainty of each word, both as isolated phenomenon and as semiotic possibility of a sentence, paragraph, or the context of the entire work. The rediscovery of that uncertainty in each word constitutes the initial attitude of the translator. Reading becomes the making of meaning and not the description of already-fixed meanings. As the imaginative text does not offer the reader a new comfortable reality but, rather, places him or her between several realities among which he or she has to choose; the words that constitute the text emanate a feeling of uncertainty. That feeling, however, becomes instrumental in the reader/translator's engagement in a continuous process of decision-making. Certain choices have to be made among all these possibilities of uncertain meanings. Whatever the translation decision might be, there is still another level of uncertainty for the reader/translator, which continues the process of reading not only within the text but even beyond the text. This proliferation of uncertainties must be viewed as one of the most stimulating and rewarding results that the reader/translator perspective finds in the study and experience of the text. Reading as the generator of uncertainties, reading as the driving force toward a decision-making process, reading as discovery of new interrelations that can be experienced but not described in terms of a content-oriented language.
Reading from a translator's point of view represents a continuous process of opening up new possibilities of interactions and semantic associations. Whatever questions the translator asks with respect to his/her involvement in a text, these questions have no prefigured answers that might be based on information brought to the text from the outside or based on clearly defined statements of context. In the translation process there are no definitive answers, only attempts at solutions in response to states of uncertainly generated by the interaction of the words' semantic fields and sounds. Reading institutes the making of meanings through questions in which the possibility of an answer results in another question: What if?
In that respect, translation-reading has much in common with the performer's attitude toward the work. Without "Erlebnis" (experience) the performance of a piece falls flat. At all times, the performer internalizes that which he or she performs. He or she is inside the work, and every note or word becomes a new possibility in the moment of its performance. Similarly, the translator/reader makes the reading activity a process in which each word begins to assume possible semantic associations. The reader/translator approach never becomes static.
Applying the translator's eye to the reading of a text changes our attitude toward the reading process by dissolving the fixity of print on a page into a potential multiplicity of semantic connections. The words on the page represent only a weak reflection of the situations that the author intended to express. The translator/reader considers the word a means to an end, the final destination of which can never be put into the limitations of static descriptions.
The methodologies of translation can therefore be used to reactivate the act of reading as a dynamic process that engages the reader in the "Erlebnis" of the literary work.
TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETATION
By Rainer Schulte
What is the function of interpretation: to provide the reader, listener, and viewer with entrances into a text, whether that text be a literary, visual, or musical work. Each artistic work presents a particular view of the world, a way of seeing objects and situations as if it were for the first time. Critics and scholars must help us to find ways of entering into these new perspectives of seeing the world. However, it seems that criticism in the last few years has failed to respond to this need. Often, critical approaches that are meant to bring the reader closer to a text have the exact opposite effect. They distance the reader from the text and close rather than open doors to a better understanding of the particular nature of a given form of artistic insight and expression.
Partly responsible for that phenomenon is the critic's and scholar's attitude to see the text as a spring board for the development of his or her own ways of thinking rather than looking at the text as something that has to be entered and clarified. What we have in this case is criticism of criticism of criticism. A look at many of the books that have been published by scholarly presses in recent years confirms this trend which has as its unfortunate consequence that many students and readers turn away from the act of reading literary works. One should remember that any work of criticism comes into existence only because there is a work that was created by the writer or artist.
To counteract this trend in contemporary criticism we looked at translation as a possible new way of revitalizing the act of interpretation. At first sight it is difficult to see the immediate relation between interpretation and translation. Seen however in the larger context of interpretation as communication with a text, the connection becomes transparent. George Steiner's comment that "all acts of communication are acts of translation" further affirms this way of thinking. There is no communication without translation and the reading of a text is an intense act of translation. The words of the philosopher Hans Georg Gadamer come to mind: "Reading is already translation, translation is translation for the second time....The process of translating comprises in its essence the whole secret of human understanding of the world and of social communication."
Thus, the methodologies of the art and craft of translation can be seen as one way of revitalizing the complicated act of interpretation not only of the literary work but also of all artistic works. What does this mean? Simply, that we begin to look at a text from the translator's point of view. The translator learns and applies methods of transplanting words, or rather situations, from one language into another. Interpreting a text within the same language can also be considered as an act of translation, and therefore an investigation of the translator's methods can shed light on the process of interpretation. What is it that the translator does when confronted with the text in the foreign language?
A few basic considerations might help to clarify the translator's procedure. The word "to trans-late" which gains even a clearer visualization with "über-setzen" in the German language underlines the notion of interaction and exchange. In its original
meaning, "über-setzen" indicates that something is being carried across from one side of the river to the other, yet what is carried across must be modified so that it can be integrated into the laws of the otherness in a new culture. What this means is that the translation process begins in the other. For a communication to take place with the other, a thorough exploration of the dynamics of the situations on the other side of the river must be undertaken. The translator's starting point --and here resides the important link with the act of interpretation--must be anchored in that which he or she has to face in the foreign text. If we transfer this idea to the act of reading within the same language, then each word must be considered a "foreign" entity. To think in the foreign constitutes the first step toward a possible interpretation that can then lead to the actual translation. Let us assume that the English translator reads the simple words "maison" or "jardin in French and initiates his or her approach to this text by thinking about these two words in terms of "house" and "garden', then a real entrance into the foreign text is seriously endangered. The English word "garden" creates a totally different atmosphere than the French "jardin." They are the same as far as the dictionary is concerned, but in terms of their cultural and aesthetic ambiance they are miles apart. The translator who decides to think through the French text in terms of the universe that surrounds the English word "garden" closes the door to any true communication with the foreign in the other language. The translator carries something to the foreign text which its semantic boundaries cannot hold. A mold is imposed on the foreign word that freezes the word's internal energy and destroys its recreative power for the dynamic interchange with other words. The interpretive process ends before it has begun.
The interpretation as translation within the same language requires the same attitude. The reader must approach each word as if it were a word in a foreign language. A writer manipulates words, often modifies and enhances their established connotations, creates new fields of meaning through the interaction with other words, and builds a universe of feelings and emotions that enlarges the reader's/interpreter's way of seeing and understanding the world. Only through the experience of the other can we expand our insights into the human condition.
Practically speaking, the interpreter as translator continuously engages in the question: what kind of research must I undertake in order to do justice to the text I am reading whether I choose to translate it from a foreign language into my own or whether I translate it into my own frame of mind within the same language? The translator's interpretive act is always rooted in the concreteness of the textual situation and not in some theoretical construct. The translator--in contrast to many critics-- does not consider the word as an object that can be described or even frozen into a specific meaning but continuously interacts with the internal of a word's magnetic field. When the interpreter assumes the translator's role, he or she lives inside the word and thereby establishes a dynamic environment rather than a static one. Even when a translation appears in the fixed form of the printed page, it cannot claim to be final. There is no such thing as the definitive translation of any text, as there is no definitive interpretation of any text. Whenever a translator returns to the same text, a different reading will take place and therefore also a different interpretation. At every moment, the translator recreates the process of interpretation in the sense of finding new connections between the two sides of the river. That process is in no way different when we read and
interpret within the same language. We constantly must transplant ourselves into the foreign so that we build the bridge from there back to our own way of seeing.
The translator who has to anchor the interpretive act in the realities of each word has to develop a certain strategy to do justice to a word as an isolated phenomenon and as the link in the ever widening circle of connotations that a word gains through its context expansion. Words, as we know, have primary and secondary meanings. No two people will ever take the exact same impression and visualization from a word. Language in itself is quite restricted: in many instances we have one or two words to describe an object. When we use the word "chair" every person immediately creates an image in his or her mind that hardly ever coincides in all its details with the visualization of that object in the mind of another person. The chair comes in multiple shapes: a high or low chair, an easy chair, a reclining chair, a swivel chair, a secretarial chair etc. It is unlikely that our first association upon hearing the word "chair" would create in our mind the image of an "electrical chair," although that might be the connotation of that word when it first appears in a literary text. In that sense the reader as interpreter and translator must unlearn language before the act of interpretation can be initiated. What we think a word connotes upon a first reading of a text rarely coincides with the connotations that the writer injected into that word. Unlearning could also be characterized as an attitude of openness toward the multiplicity of meanings working within any given word. The tremendous variety inherent in the presence of chairness underlines the dilemma that faces all writers: to create through language something that transcends language. Not only does the chair come in many different shapes, but the specific appearance creates varying emotional reactions in the viewer. A French chair built under Louis XIV generates an atmosphere quite different from a contemporary Swedish or Danish chair, not to speak of a chair that was chiselled out of a stone. A writer's foremost concern is not to offer statements of meanings to the reader, but to build atmospheres which make it possible for the reader to experience a situation. In order to succeed in this endeavor writers constantly discover new relationships between words that have to be reconstructed in the interpretive process by the reader/ translator. Yet, we must remember that a word does not only exist through its semantic reality. Each word comes to life with a certain specific physicality that includes its meaning possibilities, its sound and rhythm, its link to cultural and historical traditions, its modified uses conditioned by geographical realities, and also its visual appearance on the page, especially in poetic forms of expression. All of these ingredients begin to work on the writer as well as on the reader. Exploration of the word's internal levels of meanings initiates the reading and translation process. The translator places himself or herself inside the word to think out its magnetic field, to uncover the streams that will flow into the semantic fields of other words. That act--which is the most fundamental one of any interpretation--should be called "visualization." The American poet W.S. Merwin opens his poem "In Autumn" with the following words: "The extinct animals are still looking for home..." None of these words pose any serious difficulties for the English-speaking reader. Yet before any entrance into the line becomes feasible, the reader must undertake an act of visualization. The expression "the animals are still looking" causes in itself no major problems. What initially confuses the reader is the combination of "extinct" with "animals." How can animals who are extinct--which might suggest that they do no longer exist--be engaged
in an act of looking. Do we change the meaning, if we replace extinct with dead? Very much so. Dead and extinct generate different processes of visualization. The use of dead in that line would derail the poetic as well as the experiential logic: a dead animal has lost the ability to look. That kind of reasoning brings us, the reader/translator, closer to the visualization of "extinct." Even though the animal as a species might be extinct, it possibly can still live as a stuffed animal in a museum. The context of the following lines in the poem seem to suggest that kind of visualization. For the combination of "extinct animals" to come to life, the reader will be forced to assess every possible existing meaning--as specified through entries in philological and etymological dictionaries--and then decipher the evolving meanings in relation to the context of the poem. Again the process of "ubersetzen" as a carrying back and forth is at work, this time within the dynamics of the text itself. Coming from the semantic field of "extinct" the reader relates that field to those emanating from other words in the text, only to come back to the starting point to see whether the context will enrich the connotations of "extinct" even beyond what we have learned about the word from the dictionary entries. That enrichment of words through the contextual progression often affects the decisions a translator of novels has to make. A word that appears on the first page of a given novel is repeated several times throughout the progression of the work. Each time the word reoccurs the translator realizes that another level of meaning has been added to the word. Finally, in the middle of the novel the translator comprehends the full impact of that word which then forces him or her to reassess the original translation choice that was made. And since frequently the new language might not have a similar word that allows for all of the nuances that the writer instilled in the word to be incorporated, the translator will choose several different words to carry the situation over into the new language environment.
From the visualization of the individual word the translator moves to the contextual visualization: the word in relation to the word before and after, to the rest of the sentence, to the paragraph, to the entire text, and finally to the oeuvre. At every step of the translator's work, questions will be asked that come out of the necessity of the word and its placement within the text. Where does the word come from, what semantic and emotional baggage has it acquired through the centuries, what original image lies behind the surface appearance, what role does it play in a given text, how often does it appear in the oeuvre of a given writer, how have other writers of the same period used the word, has the writer revived a meaning-aspect that was prominent in a previous century but not necessarily common today, and how has it been treated, if at all, by other translators and critics? All of these considerations constantly bombard the translator's consciousness, and they should also be the major concerns of any person who approaches the interpretation of a text. A famous critic is said to have interpreted a particular passage in a Henry James story where the word "coil" appeared. The critic, at the time deeply involved in studying Sigmund Freud, constructed an interpretive approach around all the possible Freudian connotations that the word "coil" brings to mind. When the article was published, the author he received a short note from the printer who told him that "coil" was actually a misprint and should have been "soil." I have never verified this incident, but even if it did not happen, it illustrates what can happen when an interpretation looses its contextual placement.
Texts from the past that have already undergone the scrutiny of time are in that sense easier to handle. Dictionaries will be able to tell us what certain words meant at a particular time of literary history. The existence of the Oxford English Dictionary is an indispensable tool for reading English texts of the past. Not only are words explained by themselves, but they are also documented with specific examples from various works written around the same time. The contemporary text, that is to say a text that has just been written by an author, poses more complicated problems. Whatever linguistic and semantic innovations the poet or writer has brought to the use of his or her language has not yet been reflected in the fixed form of a dictionary. It might show up in a few years which is of little help for the current reader and interpreter. In that case the new meaning attributed to a word or an expression can only be illuminated through the process of a rigorous contextual visualization. The English writer Francis Bacon wrote an essay entitled "Of Studies" in 1597. The first sentence of that essay reads: "Studies serve for pastimes, for ornaments and for abilities." For that sentence to regain meaning for the modern reader, a series of scholarly pursuits have to be undertaken. Literary history tells us that this essay, when first published, had a certain impact. Since the words "pastimes, ornaments, abilities" have changed through the centuries, we no longer have immediate access to the power of expression they had in their own time. Thus, a process of translation of these words into the present linguistic and semantic environment has to be initiated. The interpreter explores the foreignness in these words and tries to find equivalents in present-day language. Once again the question has to be asked: "what kind of research do I have to undertake in order to do justice to this line or text? Actually, the investigation of a single word such as "pastimes" or "ornaments" could serve as an agent to reconstruct an entire Zeitgeist of that period. Starting with the exploration of all the immediate connotations associated with those two words, the reader/translator will then pursue the cultural, aesthetic, artistic, social or political nuances that might be working in these words. What becomes clear in this approach is the important recognition that all translation research --in whatever direction it might lead the translator--will always lead the reader back to the text itself. Here lies a major difference between critical and translational practices. In the former case, critics often distance themselves from the text without feeling any obligation to return to it at the end of their interpretations.
Using the dictionary definitions for the word "abilities" might not necessarily provide us with a totally intelligible meaning of how the word is used in the line. Yet, the various choices given generate in the reader ways of thinking about the text that otherwise would not have happened. Here are some definitions given for "ability" in the OED: suitableness, fitness, aptitude, faculty, capacity, bodily power, strength, wealth, talent, cleverness, mental power or capacity. The gamut of associations could probably be extended some more. Somewhere inbetween all of these definitions lies the meaning of "ability," that the translator must decipher in his or her act of interpretation. The example brings us back to the above mentioned comments about chair and chairness. The plurality of existing chair designs reaffirms that there is such a thing as chair. On a higher level, one could say the multiplicity of existing bible translations throughout the centuries reassures us that there is such a thing as the bible. With respect to the excursion into the word "ability," the translator must move among all of these dictionary possibilities, since each one of them will force him or her to return to
the text and rethink the line in terms of each given meaning. In that sense, the act of interpretation seen through the translator's eyes develops a reader's and student's ability to visualize a text. From the practice of translation we learn above all the art of "situational thinking."
The Bacon example showed how one can approach a text through the exploration of one word with its numerous branches of meanings. That practice can be transferred to the interpretation of texts, especially poems, through multiple translations. A poem can never be fully recreated in another language through one translation. However, the use of multiple translations of a given poem transplanted by several translators opens up a different way of thinking about the poem. A case in point is the opening line of Rainer Maria Rilke's "The Panther." In the original it says "Sein Blick ist vom Vorübergehn der Stäbe...." The key word in that line is "Blick" which has been translated by "glance, vision, seeing, sight, gaze." The English reader immediately perceives the differences between the words that the translators used to render "Blick." Clear boundaries can be drawn around the semantic fields of glance and the other renderings. The activity of visualization contained in "glance" is different from that of "vision." That practice leads the reader/interpreter to an intense interaction with the situations that each one of these words create as an isolated phenomenon but possibly also in the context of the line. In addition, the comparison of these expressions will automatically force the interpreter to ask the simple question: why did the various translators come up with these diverse solutions? That question takes the reader back to think in the context of the original German poem. Something foreign in that text needs to be uncovered that is responsible for the multiplicity of renderings. Thinking out the word in the German reveals that indeed the word comprises two directions of meaning at the same time: on the one hand "Blick" encompasses the content of looking at an object, on the other it is also the activity of seeing. Thus, the English solutions of "seeing and glance" versus "sight and vision." Naturally, none of the English words contain the double activity at work in the original German text. So far, the interpretive process has only dealt with the dynamics of one single word. Now the reader has to explore whether the two directions of thinking within the word are essential to the further development of the poem. Could it be that this ambiguity were to become a structuring principle for the entire poem? Thus, the reader/translator will dissect the rest of the poem, only to assemble it again at the end of that process and relate it back to the situational thinking in the word "Blick."
The study of a poem through the medium of various translations displays the complex associations of poetic thinking and induces the reader to ask questions about the nature of the poem that otherwise would not have been asked. Out of all these various interpretations readers can formulate their own ways of seeing and interpreting the poem. This kind of reading offers an extraordinary richness of perceptions, a living inside the poem, which could rarely be reached by reading just one translation of a given poem. As an afterword to these remarks it is curious to realize that to this day there is no anthology in the English-speaking world that would provide the reader with a selection of multiple translations of the same text. Such a textbook could indeed become one of the most valuable tools to introduce students to the art of reading and interpreting. This kind of reading is always anchored in the reality and the concreteness of the text which generates its own excitement by forcing the reader to actively recreate
the interactions and relationships in a text. The text becomes an experience rather than an object that is being seen by the reader/interpreter from a distance. Participation replaces description.
What then does the reader learn from the methodologies derived from the art and craft of translation? As readers transplant themselves into the atmosphere of a new situation in the foreign text, they realize that the text does not build just one clearly-defined reality, but, rather, possibilities of various realities. The readers are left with various options that they can interpret within the context of that atmosphere. The reader/translator reestablishes at every step of his or her work the inherent uncertainty of each word, both as isolated phenomenon and as semiotic possibility of a sentence, paragraph, or the context of the entire work. The rediscovery of that uncertainty in each word constitutes the initial attitude of the translator. Reading and thus interpreting become the making of meaning and not the description of already-fixed meanings. The foreign text does not offer the reader a new comfortable reality, but, rather, places him or her between several realities among which he or she has to choose; the words that constitute the text emanate a feeling of uncertainty. That feeling, however, becomes instrumental in the reader/translator's engagement in a continuous process of decision-making. Certain choices have to be made among all these possibilities of uncertain meanings. Whatever the translation decision might be, there is still another level of uncertainty for the reader/translator, which continues the process of reading not only within the text but even beyond the text. This proliferation of uncertainties must be viewed as one of the most stimulating and rewarding results that the reader/translator perspective finds in the study and interpretation of a text. Reading as the generator of uncertainties, reading as the driving force toward a decision-making process, reading as discovery of new interrelations that can be experienced but not described in terms of a content-oriented language. Whatever questions translators ask with respect to their involvement in a text, these questions have no prefigured answers that would be prompted by outside information brought to the text or content-oriented statements about the text. In the translation process there are no definitive answers, only attempts at solutions in response to states of uncertainty generated by the interaction of the words' semantic fields and sounds. Reading institutes the making of meanings through questions in which the possibility of an answer results in another question: What if?
To look at a text from a translator's point of view changes our way of thinking about interpretation. Thomas S. Kuhn talks in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions about paradigm shifts as a vital necessity for the creation and the development of disciplines. Translation methodologies and their transferral to the field of interpretation have generated a paradigm shift in how we read and understand texts. When we think within the framework of translation, words such as integration, interactivity, interconnectedness, and interrelationships come to mind. In other words, the translation process establishes a systemic way of looking at a text. Everything is related to everything else in the overall structure of a poem, play, or novel. Even though the translator begins with a technique of dissecting every detail of a given sentence or paragraph, he or she will consider all individual insights and discoveries as part of an overall coherent structure. The translator aims at the reconstruction of the totality of a text in its human and historical context. Therein lies the integrating power of the translator's way of looking at works of art. Thus, a study dedicated to the reconstruction
of the translation process will provide the reader/interpreter with the tools to change interpretive perspectives that rebuild texts as dynamic rather than static entities. The translator's point of view positions the translator inside the text as a recreator of its complex semantic levels of expression. The composer Aaron Copland distinguishes three ways of listening to music: one where we notice music only when it is no longer played, as for example in department stores; one where we try to impose a specific meaning on any given composition, as with Beethoven's moon light sonata; and one where we become involved in listening and interpreting the melodic and structural lines of a piece of music. It is the last one that is the most exciting one and it is also the one that can be achieved by transferring the methodologies derived from the art and craft of translation to the interpretation of literary texts. The interpreter emulates the author's intensity through an intense form of recreation. At times the pleasures derived from the interpretive act can equal the pleasures experienced by the original writer/ artist.
As the translation methodologies change our way of approaching the practice of interpretation, they also innovate our research attitudes. Translation research is always based on the necessity to solve problems. That problem-solving capacity requires that research be anchored each time in the necessity of the actual moment in the text. Translators don't bring anything to the text, they evolve everything from the text. The recurring question remains: what research is necessary to respond to the difficulties encountered in a work? All efforts of defining the course of research thinking is generated from the need of the actual textual situation that the translator has to face. Furthermore, based on the need of a particular moment in the text the translator's research procedures and tactics will always be of an interdisciplinary nature. The exploration of a word or a situation frequently takes the translator beyond the boundaries of one discipline. In that sense, translation methods can not only be considered a revitalizing power in the literary field but also in the entire spectrum of humanistic and artistic interpretation. The methodologies of translation can be used as a dynamic process that engages the reader or the viewer and listener in a more intense "experience" of the artistic work.
THE ACT OF TRANSLATION: FROM INTERPRETATION TO INTERDISCIPLINARY THINKING
By Rainer Schulte
To understand the inherent relation between translation and the reading of a text, the function and tasks of translator and literary critic/scholar must be rethought. That literary criticism and scholarship have come under heavy attack from various sides during the last few years is no longer a secret. The attacks are in most cases not unjustified. Frequently, scholars of literature have developed a language that obscures rather than illuminates the literary text. Criticism and scholarship were supposed to open up channels of understanding for the reader and show him how he can enter into a text and intensify his experience of the text. This function has largely vanished, and it appears that the scholar makes the literary text unnecessarily inaccessible to the reader and student. Rather than widening the horizons of understanding, the scholar restricts
and hinders the exchange that a reader might have with a text. Literary criticism has increased the distance between reader and text to the extent that the scholar/critic reverses the function he was supposed to perform: he takes the reader away from the text, decreases the reader's enjoyment of the text and obscures possible entrances into the text. The relationship between reader and text has been greatly disturbed when the scholar views the literary text as an object removed from himself, as an object somewhere in the distance that can be described and dissected with prefabricated patterns of scholarly jargon. The dilemma is great: few scholarly articles are accessible to the student and reader of literature, and very few of them were written with inner enthusiasm and excitement derived from the text. These articles, devoid of inner substance and intellectual intensity and insight, can be found in many established scholarly and literary journals. They have done a great disservice to the study of literature and the humanities and are in part responsible for the low esteem that the study of literature receives today.
New ways must be found to revitalize literary criticism. Translation offers one possible solution in that direction. The act of translation can help to re-establish a natural interaction between reader/translator and text. After all, the act of translation is first of all an act of interpretation. The translator cannot afford to think around a text--which is frequently the case with scholars; he must think through the text, through each word, each sentence, each paragraph. The translator struggles with each word, he must establish a relationship with the magnetic field of each word before he can commit himself to a possible interpretation of a text. This activity is basically different from the removed scholarly activity. Whoever translates a text must interact with the text and may not run away from it to look for facts and information which have very little to do with the actual reading of the text.
The act of interpretation that precedes the act of translation is of a rather delicate nature. Although the translator works with words, his first concern is not the translation of individual words. He has to work himself inside the words to determine what directions of meanings the writer wanted to indicate through one or several words. The words will lead the translator to the visualization of the situation that is being created through the sequence of words, and it is that situation that he transplants into the medium and possibilities of another language by finding the words in the new language that most adequately reflect and express the atmosphere of the situation created in the source language. Good critical reading should aspire to that kind of reading intensity so that the act of interpretation is closely connected to the interaction with each word of the literary text. What the critic does portrays in many ways the mental process which the translator must undertake in order to create a good translation. The critic must visualize the situation that lies behind words so that he can formulate the experience of that situation through the means of his critical language. It is the experience of reading and enjoying the text that he must recreate through the language of criticism, not the reduction of that text to moral, social or ideological statements. His experience becomes transparent in the particular way he interacts with the text, in his personal perception of the text. That personal perception has to be captured by words so it can be imparted to another reader and open for the reader new ways of approaching a literary work of art. Since this natural interaction with the text has been disturbed by the fabrication of a scholarly language, which is in no way related to the reflection of a genuine thought
process generated by the reading of a text, the critic should look to the translator for the revitalization of his own art.
Good criticism is as creative as good translating. However, the methods and thought processes the translator has to use in order to penetrate the text are closely tied to the study of words and the directions of meanings these words indicate within the poetic or fictional structure of a work. The translator cannot escape from the text; he remains at all times inside the text, since any negligence or omission on his part will show up immediately. He cannot afford to omit difficult passages in a text, and at every step of his work as a translator he must make decisions that will not violate the basic atmosphere of the situation established within the text. Intensity of perception and weighing the nuances of meaning from one word to the next characterize his work as interpreter/translator. For the translator the literary text is never something which he observes coldly or from a distance; for him the text is a very concrete reality with which he interacts continuously. That intense interaction constitutes a never-ending expansion of thought process, for the translator in his capacity as interpreter moves from one mental association to the next in the reading of the text. His reading is not merely a reading, it is a living through the text which makes the aesthetic experience possible. The critic must create the language that does justice to that experience, the translator must find the words in the new language which will transplant the atmosphere of that experience from the source language into this new language. The results are different, but the mental processes are similar.
The specific approaches that a translator uses in his reading of a text before he translates it into a new linguistic environment might be helpful in revitalizing the scholar's activities. Two distinct functions fall within the perimeter of the translator's work. He must think his way through a text word by word, sentence by sentence, page by page, and he must learn how much meaning and how many directions of meanings a word can hold, either as an isolated structure or in the context of a sentence. He also must try to determine what the writer's intention was and whether that intention has been adequately and clearly fixed through the restricting possibilities of words used in a particular text. All literary texts are fragments--as are perhaps all artistic creations--and therefore the translator has to take it upon himself to reconstruct the total image and situation that is conveyed through the limiting possibilities of language.
The act of reconstruction, that probing of what reality there is behind the surface of the words used on the page, is the act of interpretation. The good translator and the good critic meet at this juncture of their work. It is an extremely intense process that requires constant interaction with the details of a text, an existential involvement with the text and re-creation of the text. The prerequisite for these activities is a mental energy which generates associations from one word to the next without stepping outside the text. One could call this activity "situational thinking" or a process of "visualization."
If that act of interpretation does not take place, negative results are generated in both scholar and critic. The former produces literary criticism that takes the surface appearance of words and translates those into a new linguistic context without ever having understood the directions of meaning that the original author tried to indicate behind the surface appearance of words. The reader of such a translation will be
confused and will experience great difficulties in visualizing the situations of the original text and their relationship to subsequent expansions of such situations.
Both scholar and translator have to counteract the constant threat of reducing a literary work to one meaning. They might bring to the text an assumption or formulation of meaning that was generated by their own personal prejudices and not by the inherent dynamics of the work. Instead of opening up a diversity of possible interpretations and directions of meaning, they can easily fall into the habit of imposing a meaning onto the text rather than drawing possible meanings from it. In both cases, they are expected to recreate the creative tension working within each text. The critic may avoid that process of recreation by falling back on an already established scholarly language which can be applied to many texts without making specific comments about any specific one. The translator falls back on the dictionary meaning of a word without investigating the specific relation of the dictionary meaning to the context within which the word has been used. Often, the dictionary meaning of a word without investigating the specific relation of the dictionary meaning to the context within which the word has been used. Often, the dictionary meaning of a word is not what is needed in the context of a particular work. That meaning has to be formulated through the perspective the translator establishes in his relation with the text.
The translator, as well as the critic, has to develop a perspective with respect to the literary text, since their interpretive insights will have to be anchored in that perspective. If a poem or short story has been translated by several translators, each translation offers a different view of the text. The success of the translation depends on the strength of the perspective established by the translator and his transplantation of that perspective into the new linguistic context of the target language. Should the translator fail to establish such a perspective, the result is generally a bad translation. If a piano sonata is performed by several different pianists, each interpretation shows the mark of the specific approach the performer has established in his interaction with the score. All interpretations are justified as long as they do not violate the original musical notation from which the performers derived their interpretation. Similarly, translators create their own view of a text, which gains credibility as long as such a view does not reduce it to one static meaning.
The study of various translations of the same text will enable the translator, and the critic, to learn something about the nature of perspectives; the diversity of perspectives should encourage him to formulate his own focus with respect to a given text. The refined work of the translator opens new dimensions and associations within the text. The translator also becomes aware that each translation needs to be adjusted to the changes that occur in the dynamics of a language. Translations therefore should be redone every fifty years. The same probably holds true for critical discussions of works. Translation will reaffirm the necessity for diversity, and the study of that diversity implants confidence in the translator to pursue his own interpretive insights of a given text. The act of translation, with all its variations of perceiving and interacting, offers ways that these insights can be approached, conceived, developed and expanded.
In all instances, the act of translation is preceded by the act of interpretation. To translate without interpretive commitment is impossible. Without interpretation the translation act degenerates into translating words rather than the dynamic situations created in a text.
The concept of "situations" links the act of translation to the broader concern of interdisciplinary thinking. To understand the inherent connection between translation and interdisciplinary thinking, the following steps have to be reiterated. When the translator begins to enter into a text, he uses the words on the page not as a goal in itself but rather as signposts for the reconstruction of the emotions and ideas that an author wanted to express in his work. Thought processes and emotions are always in a state of flux, never really finite in their progression. Therefore, the translator must learn something about the dynamic possibilities of the words he comes in contact with on the pages. Through an exploration of the ramifications and nuances of each word he acquires a feeling and a visualization of the situation that the author wanted to bring to life.
The key element in this process is the recognition that the translator must relate each word--its immediate and hidden possibilities of meaning--to the situation that an author wants to project. These situations become transparent through the particular interaction of words set up by the author. In this sense, each word on the page becomes a very fragile entity that is being molded by the translator's interaction with the word. When he interacts with the word, he must draw from the word the angle of meaning that is in accordance with the situation and the atmosphere of the text. Often, those aspects of meaning or meanings are not in immediate relationship to the obvious finite meaning that we draw from a word when we first encounter it on the page. Words have strong primary and secondary meanings. By the former, I mean those connotations which come immediately to mind when we read or hear a word. However, those obvious layers of meaning might not be the meanings that the author intended as primary meanings within the context of the particular words. At that moment, the translator must adopt a more flexible attitude toward the word in order to become aware of the possible different direction of meaning that the author has given to a word or a sequence of words. Translation then opens channels of interaction with words and does not reduce the word to one or several finite meanings. That process, however, always relates the word to a situation and does not see it in isolation, just as a word. In that continuous effort to relate words to a situation lies the anchor of translation as an interdisciplinary activity. Translation as situational thinking, translation as a never-ending process of relating a word to a situation, clearly reflects the though process that also leads to interdisciplinary thinking. When the translator begins to interpret the text, he has to bring the aspect of meaning indicated by the word into immediate relationship with the situation that underlies the text. The translator moves between situation and word, but his thinking must always be anchored in the situation and not in the appearance of a word. He makes the decision about which nuance of meaning he has to draw from the word to fit it into the atmosphere of the situation. His thinking therefore is not primarily rooted in the word as word, but in the exploration of a situation that he builds from the direction of meanings imparted to him through words. Yet, the situation has a life of its own which is beyond the linguistic means of language. The dynamics inherent in that situation have to be approximated by the linguistic means of the new language into which the text is being translated.
Each word then has to be adopted and geared into the direction of the situational atmosphere. The constant flow between word and situations, and the decision-making process on the translator's part not to violate the basic boundaries of that situation, are
inherently interdisciplinary ways of going about studying a subject matter. Translation is a problem-solving activity that considers the word not as an isolated phenomenon but always in association with something else: the visualization of a situation. Words have to be brought into harmony with the situation, and the solutions come from the translation does is simply an intensification of developing numerous threads. In the process of translation, the translator approximates (through words) the overall impression of the situation received from the study of the original language to be transplanted into the possibilities of the new language. What the translation does is simply an intensification of developing numerous threads between word and situation, not to see them as two separate entities (words on the one hand, situation on the other) that can be dealt with separately. That interaction requires active participating and involvement, inside exploration of the text and not distancing from the text. All efforts of interpretation lead to the situation, and the problems that arise can only be solved within the context of the situation and not within the individual meaning of a word.
Interdisciplinary thinking is the relentless effort to adjust thinking (which is expressed through words) to the refined necessities of a situation. By becoming sensitive to the needs of the situation, a solving of the problem can be initiated.Interdisciplinarity could then be defined as the communication between a situation and words, in which the words take an active role in discovering the dynamics of that situation. Discovering leads to understanding, and understanding based on the visualization of a situation initiates the process of finding solutions, whether it is the realm of translating a text or approaching a subject matter from an interdisciplinary point of view.
Translation and interdisciplinary activities are anchored in situational thinking. Translation revitalizes the thought process by thinking out possibilities of interaction and meaning within a given text, to choose from these possibilities a solution which comes closest to the atmosphere of the situation. Decisions are made within the dynamics of the text; thinking grows out of the situation within a text and is not brought to the text from the outside.
A genuine act of interpretation opens up a natural flow of interaction between reader/translator and the text in order to get a feeling for the situation that lies behind words (but still is created by words). Once the situation has been fully visualized the process of transplanting it into a new linguistic environment begins. Interdisciplinary thinking is of a similar nature: it establishes channels of interaction with a situation and all the possible ramifications of associations within that situation in order to start a decision-making process. The latter might lead to the construction of new thought associations which generate the possibility of finding solutions in harmony with the needs of the situation.
LITERARY TRANSLATION: AN ANCHOR OF INTERDISCIPLINARY THINKING
By Rainer Schulte
Several attempts have been made in recent years to establish interdisciplinary programs in various institutions across the country. Narrow specialization or over-specialization within one discipline no longer seems to meet the demands of our present educational needs. It is not clear in all cases what these needs might be, but in general, humanistic studies have lost a great deal of the vitality and enthusiasms that they had in earlier periods of our civilization.
It is my contention that the art of translation can play an important role in developing interdisciplinary thinking, and that Translation Programs will rapidly assume the same importance that Creative Writing Programs now enjoy in most literature departments. Translation can be considered one of the most intense ways of revitalizing the study of literature.
A few maxim-like statements might capture the thrust that humanistic studies will have to take in the next few years.
1. The future of humanistic studies will greatly depend on how well we succeed in developing interdisciplinary thinking and methods.
2. With respect to the study of literature: The traditional methods of literary studies have greatly contributed to taking the reader away from the text rather than drawing him into the text.
3. The art and craft of translation can be considered one of the most important ways to develop interdisciplinary thinking through which the reader can be brought back to the text.
A literary text can be approached from two different angles: from the point of view of the writer who produces the text, and from the point of view of the reader, scholar and critic who tries to describe and illuminate the text. The person who is in the habit of creating a text generally reads other texts with greater intensity and awareness. The writer and poet reads the text from within and tunes into the structures that underlie a work of writing. The function of the scholar/critic is to enter a text, to understand a text, describe its various levels of structure and meaning and to lead the reader back to the creative impulse that was responsible for the creation of the text. Both ways of looking at a text can easily lose perspective. The scholar frequently sees a text as nothing more than a historical, social, psychological document, and largely ignores the aesthetic value of the text by focusing on a sequence of mental footnotes. The writer might not apply any critical standards to the text, but sanction everything he does by labeling it "creative." The act of translation, however, can succeed in establishing a healthy balance between the creation of the text and its interpretation. Naturally, no translation can come about without the act of interpretation that precedes it. Translation fosters creative reading of the text. An intense exchange between the text and the reader is established through the close reading that translation requires from the translator. In that sense it is perhaps no coincidence that most poets have also been involved in translations.
In what way then does the act of translation intensify interdisciplinary thinking? To answer this question, we must first establish the relationship between translation and interpretation. Without an act of interpretation, no true translation is possible. And interpretation is seen here not as the accumulation of information on the text, but as a process of visualizing the situations as they occur in the text of the source language. "Visualization" is a key word in the translation and interpretation process. Words have their lexicon meaning, but in a literary text, especially in a poetic text, words take on meanings that are beyond or different from the immediate lexicon meaning. The translator as interpreter has to visualize the directions of meaning that are suggested by the particular sequence of words or sentence structures the poet has created. That process of visualizing the various levels of meanings and ambiguities is extremely slow, but has to be started in the source language before the translator can even think about translating a line. Practically speaking,t he translator must start his work by an extensive use of dictionaries in the source language in order to prepare a full visualization of the situation as presented in the original text. The dictionary activity in the source language might be as intense as the dictionary usage from the source language into the target language. The translator must learn very rapidly that his major function is to think out relationships that exist between words so that he recreates the situation and not just words. That kind of activity will show the translator the multiplicity of nuances that interact between words; he will acquire a keener sense of language awareness and is therefore concerned with the transplantation of situations rather than words, although ultimately that transplantation has to be materialized through words. IN any translation it is easy to detect those translators who have only worked on the level of transferring lexicon meaning rather than the ramifications of meanings inherent in a situation. The true translator works through associative thought processes by constantly thinking out relationships between words, between sentences, between linguistic structures. He is always aware of the multiple explosive possibilities that can happen between words. The translator starts with a lexicon understanding of the word, but then he must proceed to investigate the historical, cultural background of words as encountered in the context of the text. Linguistic understanding functions as the beginning to place the text within a cultural context. This process can never be a linear one; it works on several levels at the same time and for that very reason falls into the realm of interdisciplinary thinking. The translator always moves between two objects, he constantly changes his frame of reference, he does not paraphrase a text but recreates the text. When a translator is involved in transferring one level of language into another, he is forced to step from one frame of reference to another. This point marks the beginning of associative thinking. The constant shift from one level of perception to another requires him at all times to find the vital language that best corresponds to that transference in the present moment. The shifting angle of approach, the constant stepping from one frame of reference to another, the exercise of visualization that takes place between words, all these factors contribute to the development of an intense interdisciplinary thinking. The process is precise in thinking out nuances, in expanding the understanding of a word's magnetic field.
No one else, whether the creator of a text or the critic of a text, would read the text with the intellectual and perceptive intensity that the translator has to bring to the text in order to effectuate a good translation. The translator is at all times involved in several processes: he tries to understand the text, he evaluates the possibilities of language and
he makes decisions about which nuance he will focus on. He combines understanding with evaluation and decision-making, all activities that are essential for the promotion of interdisciplinary thinking. Theory and practice find a harmonious balance in the act of translation, but always oriented toward solving problems as they emerge during the process of translation. Translation, like all interdisciplinary studies, takes place in the present. It is a process that combines various activities at the same time. Since language is in a constant flow of change, translation problems are never the same. A translation of the same text five years later poses different problems of language sensibility which accounts for the fact that probably all texts should be retranslated every twenty-five years.
Human situations are of a similar nature. They are never the same, they change from one moment to the next and no one single method learned within the confines of a discipline can be used to approach such a situation. A certain mental flexibility comes into play in order to meet the constantly changing aspects of a situation. Herein lies the essence of an interdisciplinary approach.
To a certain degree, the act of translation can be compared to the work of a performer. The performer starts with the signs on the page; they might be words or musical notations. The process that the performer has to initiate is somewhat the reverse of what the creator of a text does. Through the signs ont he page the performer tries to understand the situation, the emotional intention that preceded the expression through signs. The creator of a text goes from the source to the flow of the river, the performer starts with the flow and works himself back to the source. IN both cases, they are performing extremely intense intellectual and emotional acts. For the performer, the signs ont he page are to be seen as tools that take him beyond the signs to the original power and energy that made the work possible. Once he has established a feeling for that power he can think about beginning to perform. With respect to the act of translation I called this process the "visualization" of the situation. For a performer to be successful he must free himself from the restrictions of the signs on the page. Once he has understood the situation that lies behind these signs, he is then in a position to establish his own mental and emotional connections with the situations that will give life and energy to his performance. As strange as it might sound,t he translator must free himself from words first before he can undertake the actual act of translation. He is not translating words, he is transferring situations through the medium of words. However, words without the substance of visualized situations behind them will never succeed in reconstructing or creating an emotional impact once they have been transferred into another language. Like the musical performer who has to know well the instrument on which he performs, the translator must know extremely well the shades of the language he translates into. Frequently, for that reason, people who know the source language very well are not necessarily good translators. Once a translator has succeeded in transplanting a situation from one language into another, he then can fall back on trying to approximate the lexicon appearance of the source language with the lexicon meanings of the language he translates into. That resemblance might almost be considered a coincidence rather than a necessity. Ten pianists who perform the same musical piece come up with ten different interpretations of the text, without, however, violating the basic signs which they study when they first come into contact with the text. In translation, similar rules apply. Let's assume someone were to translate a poem from Spanish into English. Then, a native Spanish speaker would retranslate the poem back into Spanish and another English-
speaking person would transplant the poem back into English. Ideally speaking they should be quite similar. However, experience has taught that this is not the case at all. The various interpretive statements of each translator have added a new dimension to the text, without necessarily violating or destroying the basic situation of the original poem. The fragility and the constant weighing of nuances and the decision making process involved in this act of translation bring the translation activity very close to the thought and work process that goes on in interdisciplinary studies. The person involved in translation and interdisciplinary studies is always at the edge of the possible and the impossible, of that which can be expressed and that which cannot be fully reflected through words, at the border where intellect and emotions meet. The intellectual process always tries to illuminate the emotional situations through a never-ending sequence of "visualizations." Translating words corresponds to playing notes in their chronological order. Translating a text is a reconstruction of situations as they occur in the text. At that level, only the intense interpreter of a text will be able to recreate a vital text in another language. As in the performing arts, often this highest kind of translation will have to rely on a strong dose of inspiration. Good translations are as rare as good works of literature, perhaps even more so.
In summary, the art of translation practiced in the context of a Humanities program can greatly contribute to an intensification of literary and humanistic studies. Translation strengthens the art of interpretation and will make it possible for readers to get back into the text, rather than just read about the text. The translator can also balance the tremendous gap that has developed between the creator of a text and the critic/scholar by focusing on a very vigorous and detailed analysis of the text itself. The translator can increase the writer's critical sense of his own language, and the translator can open channels for the scholar to learn how to read a text, to think through a text, which might lead to an expansion of the aesthetic experience of the text. And Finally, the approaches that a translator has to use in order to make possible a transference of a text from one language to another are quite similar to those used in interdisciplinary thinking. Translation increases a person's mental and methodological flexibility, it is always production-oriented and combines understanding with processes of evaluation and decision-making when confronted with a situation or a problem in the present.
LITERARY TRANSLATION: TOWARD AN ESTHETIC OF COMPLEXITY
By Rainer Schulte
In the last few years, translation has taken on a revitalized importance in a world where non-communication has penetrated all strata of our society. We try to translate our ideas and emotions into words, only to find out that others do not comprehend them or draw conclusions that were contrary to our intentions. The specialized scholar molds the results of his research into semantic and syntactical structures that are often inaccessible to other scholars in the same field. The scientist working on the third floor of a research institute needs to communicate the results of his research to other scientists on the fourth floor--who are working on a different project but need the results from the third floor--and finds out that the frame of reference of his language paradigm
is not understood on the fourth floor. Business people travel from one country to another and have to learn that the signs of their body language and social behavior often initiate totally unexpected reactions, and therefore cause embarrassment and uneasiness in situations where communication is of the utmost importance.
In its more narrowly defined semantic connotations, translation is concerned with the transferral of linguistic structures from one language into another: words, sentences, idiomatic expressions, and cultural phenomena are carried from the source language into the target language. We know that there are not exact equivalencies of words between one language and another, or even within the same language. No synonym ever fully replaces another word, and even when words denote the same object in two different languages, the magnetic fields of these words might have distinctly different vibrations in the two cultures. The words for "fire" are quite similar in German and English and even sound alike: "Feuer" in German and "fire" in English. However, the cultural and metaphorical connotations of "Feuer" in the German literary tradition appear to be so much more complex than those of "fire" in English. Naturally, the translator is confronted with an almost impossible task.
Translators continue to refine their insights and methods as they engage in the process of transferring the content of situations from the source language to the target language. Many decisions have to be made and many compromises have to be weathered, and the gnawing feeling of never being able to reach the level of a complete and totally satisfactory translation will haunt every translator, In that sense, there are not solutions, only attempts at solutions, whenever a translator, by the very nature of the profession, has to satisfy the linguistic, cultural, and aesthetic demands and traditions of two languages.
Literary texts, especially poetic texts, often reflect very intricate and complex situations of human interactions or abstract thinking. Writers pursue complicated thought processes and try to frame explosive emotional moments into images and metaphors. We know that metaphors, because of their inherent function of generating new insights, can hardly ever be reduced to simple linear and causal explanations. For them to be transferred from one language to another, they must be recreated as a totality and not as isolated recognizable parts. Translators confront these situations and the power they emanate as linguistic manifestations of the writer's new and modified perceptions of the world. Since most writers and poets move at the forefront of building new forms of understanding, forms that do not fit into established ways of interpretation, translators reenact the various channels of perception and thinking that lead to the formulation of these forms. That process of reconstructing parallel and interrelated thought processes places the highest demand on translators. As there is never only one simple connotation for a word or sentence--and considering the inadequacy of language as a means of communication--the translator's constant challenge is to rebuild the complexity of a text before it can be readied for translation.
In this respect the translator clashes with established ways of approaching the interpretation of literary texts. Those approaches are based on the assumption that poetic and fictional texts can be explained by simple statements of meaning. The most extreme case of this attitude is reflected in those textbooks that reduce intricate imaginative complexities to the level of multiple choice questions and answers. If indeed an artistic text could be fully understood by a statement of meaning, then the necessity
for such a text would have to be questioned, the artistic text could easily have been replaced by a descriptive comment.
However, literature at its best opens new ways of seeing, introduces new perspectives, expands our insight into the complexity of human relationships, and offers us certain ordering principles in that complexity to give us direction and even reassurance. The function of reading--and consequently of interpreting and understanding--should be the reconstruction of complex relationships and not their reduction to simple formulas. A belief in the possibility of one meaning and only one meaning as the result of an interpretation for a literary work would be contrary to any concept of creativity.
What then can the translator contribute to reverse this specific tendency in current literary criticism? His is the never-ending task of exploring all the possible variations and nuances that emerge from the use of individual words as isolated phenomena and as part of a larger syntactical and semantic structure. The poet makes us see things in a different way; he discovers for us connotations of meanings in words that we had not seen before and thereby opens up new aesthetic experiences for us. The translator--often reversing the scholar's inclinations and practices--recreates the various semantic and emotional connotations that a poet might have injected into a poem. He thereby enlarges the possibility for meanings rather than reducing poetic expressions to one specific meaning. As the poet endows certain words with meanings they have not had before, he forces us to become involved in the diversity of possible perceptions and expressions. And the goal of all reading, interpreting, and understanding is to comprehend and order the complex relations that we encounter in works of art as parallels to life situations.
Because of the particular attitude that translators assume with respect to a literary text, they might be able to contribute to the revitalization of literary interpretation as criticism. Translators are those strange creatures who always exist in an in-between state. They are neither source language nor target language; they have to place themselves in the middle of that bridge between source language and target language, watching both languages at the same time, never too sure whether they can maintain their position in the middle without violating one or the other. Their position requires them to develop methodologies of interacting, of interrelating, of assessing simultaneous possibilities. To them, words are rarely what they appear to be in a dictionary; words are fragile, not fixed in meaning by themselves but only entities that gain and regain meaning in their relation to other words within the same text. One could easily demonstrate that each fictional and poetic text creates its own lexical environment that is unique, irreplaceable, and not verifiable through the already existing lexical definitions and connotations of meaning. The translator lives through the word as potential linkage to another word out of which semantic fields and directions are created. Each situation demands its own linguistic structure, and since the translator starts with the linguistic appearance on the page, each situation has to be recreated anew with each reading. If we take the spanish word "la case," then our immediate English equivalent appears to be "house." If that word refers to a "case" in the context of a tribe living in the jungle, then the translation as "house"might easily endanger the situational context. "Shack" or "hut" might be more appropriate at that point. It is the
translator who establishes that situational contact within the context of the particular text he is dealing with. For the translator, connotations can only be derived from interconnecting words within the textual context.
We read to uncover new worlds, to see what we have not seen before, to experience new ways of ordering our world, to expand our never-ending desire to form new connections. Translators intensify the act of reading for us, they introduce us to unknown worlds of relationships and provide us with thought processes and methodologies that allow us to penetrate deeper into the complexities of literary texts. They place less emphasis on interpretive statements and explore the field of meanings that might evolve between words; they take us back to the dynamics of language before language becomes enshrined into the fixity of lexical meanings; they make us listen to words so that sounds reinforce the intended sense of words.
Translators provide us with a finished product: a text transplanted from the source language into English. They open new cultural and aesthetic realms for us and initiate channels of communication with other cultures so that we may better understand and judge our own culture. Through translation we are offered the opportunity to participate in the mysterious strangeness of other countries. The translated text is the translator's most visible contribution to our civilization. Beyond that, translators can also teach us to refine our internalization of language, to elevate reading to one of the most energizing activities in our lives, and to revitalize the art of literary criticism. The latter might just make translation methodologies one of the most important impulses to invade the literary academy in the next few years. Literature died when the literary work was replaced by criticism. Literature might come back to life through the art and craft of translation.
INTERPRETIVE APPROACHES TO VERBAL AND NON-VERBAL TEXTS
By Rainer Schulte
Since we still have not arrived at a fully satisfactory definition of a work of art, there can be no single answer to what constitutes a satisfactory and complete interpretation of a text. During the last few decades, various schools of criticism have tried to monopolize the critical approaches to verbal and non-verbal texts; some of them have offered viable ways of interpretation, others have totally obscured a possible entrance into artistic and humanistic works. Especially in the field of the arts, quite a few critical and scholarly studies have made works totally inaccessible to the reader, spectator or listener, which might contribute to the conspicuous diminution of interest in and enjoyment of involvement in artistic works during the last few years. Thus, the processes that lead to a meaningful interpretation of texts should be rethought and perhaps even be redirected.
First of all, let it be said that there never can be a fully satisfactory interpretation of a text. Were this to happen, then the interpretation of a text could actually replace the text itself. Some critics have claimed either that their interpretations have replaced
the original text, or that they no longer need it for their exercises in interpretation. However important or relevant these discussions might be, the interpretation of a text, and especially of an artistic text, can never be reduced to one single statement of interpretation.
If the original work is rich enough in substance and ambiguity, the act of interpreting will expand and enrich itself with each interaction that takes place between the reader and the work. A pianist or violinist who performs the same sonata over and over again will rarely present two identical interpretations of the work. According to the particular emotional and psychological circumstances, the interpretation will vary from one performance to the next. That does not mean that the performer distorts the work, since he always stays within the chronological sequence of metronome time. What changes are the relationships that the performer perceives from one moment to the next, from one interpretation to the next. According to the alertness and flexibility of the performers' imagination, they will discover new interactions in a piece every time they come in touch with it. At no time, however, does the performer violate the boundaries of a work.
The word "boundary" needs some further clarification in this context. Assuming that each work is distinctly different from another in its artistic intent and execution, no method of interpretive approach can be used in the exact same way when we move from one text to another. As the character of every work changes, so does the method or methods of interpretive intent. One of the primary objectives of the interpreter must be the desire to figure out the boundaries within which a work was conceived and created. The interpretation of such a work flows from the necessity and limitations of these boundaries. And the recognition of the boundaries will prevent the interpreter from bringing all kinds of outside information to the work, information that is imposed upon the work rather than derived from it. For critical and scholarly interpretive approaches to become meaningful once again, a drastic reorientation has to take place. Instead of the critic's constant effort to go outside a work to collect biographical, social, cultural, and historical material--which might or might not be relevant to the work--to illuminate it the interpretive act must begin with a simple interaction of reader and text. It is in the continuous exchange between reader and text that an interpretation and understanding of a work begin to emerge.
As the focus and the perspective of interaction with a work change, so does the ensuing result that finds expression through the language of criticism. This critical attitude requires certain modes of reorientation within the field of criticism. The notion that artistic texts can be reduced to one or two statements of interpretation that offer an irreversible answer to the questions and problems of that text must be abandoned in favor of the recognition that interpretation expands our understanding of the complexities inherent in a text. What seemed for quite some time to have been an accepted concept of criticism--the reduction of texts to linear statements--now must be reversed so that the real function of the critic is seen as the reconstruction of the complexity of a work. The more the critic succeeds in rebuilding and rethinking the various levels of interaction in a text, the more his or her interpretation will open channels of entrance for the reader. Critical thinking and writing must adopt a divergent rather than a convergent attitude.
The emphasis lies on the word "diversity," which goes contrary to established critical approaches. We must remind ourselves that there is no one single correct interpretation of a text, especially of a work of art. Many possible ways of looking at a work can exist, according to the particular perspective that the critic establishes between the work and himself or herself. Naturally, such an approach should not be confused with identifying interpretation as an arbitrary exercise that makes room for any critic to air his or her personal idiosyncracies of taste and knowledge. For any interpretation to become meaningful, critics must establish their own interaction with a work, but they then have to maintain a consistency within that perspective. Furthermore, within the frame of reference they have set up, they will try to show the multiple interactions that take place within a text so that the readers are forced to expand their perceptions of the various possibilities inherent in a text. All of this presupposes that the readers are willing to take the time and energy to interact with a text, rather than reading various critical statements that then come to replace their own efforts to find entrance to a work. That practice of reading the critics first, before any attempt is made at reading the original work, is a widespread phenomenon and has seriously imbalanced the reader's natural relation with an original work.
This kind of criticism demands that the readers begin to assemble the facts that they encounter in the work so that concepts and ideas about possible interpretations can be derived from their analysis. In a sense the process has been reversed: no preconceived notions and opinions are brought to the text from the outside, but rather structures of interrelationships are built from within a text. At this level of interpretation, statements of judgment are not called for. Critics have to grant writers or artists their frame of reference, whether the critics personally agree or disagree with it. By recognizing this frame of reference, the critic can pursue how consistent the author has been in staying within the boundaries of that frame. Judgments of taste and value can enter the scene at that point. If a reader does not believe in the first sentence of Kafka's "Metamorphosis" as a viable entrance into and foundation of a story, then there is no need for him or her to pursue the rest of the story. After the negation of this premise, nothing int he story will make sense.
In his or her interaction the critic organizes the facts he or she finds in a text and offers the pattern he or she detects behind the facts to the reader. In this organized sequence of thinking through a text from a particular point of view, the readers will find an opportunity to look at a text from an angle that they themselves would not have been able to see. If the organization of the facts by the critic makes sense to the readers, then they will include this new way of looking at a text in all their subsequent exchanges with the text. In that sense, the process of interpretation constitutes a never-ending expanding dialogue between reader and text.
Readers discover a text rather than taking descriptive statements about the text as their initial starting point. The level of discovery depends on a multitude of possibilities, from the actual simple reading of words and signs to their associative connotations within the context of a work. And in that intense process of analysis that orders the facts in a work, critics find one of their most valuable tools the act of comparison: a refinement in the methodologies of comparison might ultimately lead to the most meaningful interpretations of verbal and non-verbal works.
MULTIPLE TRANSLATIONS: INTERPRETIVE PERSPECTIVE
By Rainer Schulte
Whenever we interpret, we bring our own perspective to the text. How that perspective can be defined and described must be one of the most challenging tasks of literary criticism. The moment certain characteristics of interpretive approaches have been sanctioned by a group of literary critics and scholars, we deal with schools of interpretation. Following the paradigm of a particular school endangers the aesthetic uniqueness of both the work and its interpretation. That which constitutes the refined perceptual shade created by the author slides into an ever boring sameness. The intriguing diversity of individual artistic expression falls victim to idiosyncratic schools of criticism. Examples have been numerous during the last decade. That dilemma transferred to the realm of translation would mean that Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky sound the same in translation, because a translator failed to recreate the specific stylistic features and visions of each respective writer.
To say that we can define the exact nature of each individual interpretive perspective would be quite pretentious. It would signal that we have discovered the secret of interpretation. Yet, the strength of the perspective developed by the critic/scholar makes it possible for us, the reader, to enter into the atmosphere of the text under consideration. As in the performance of a musical piece, the interpreter also becomes known in the act of interpretation. No two performances by the same person will ever be the same. Similarly, no interpretation or translation of a literary text can be repeated in its exact sameness. All interpretations ultimately depend on the psychological make-up of the one who interprets or performs. As William Weaver once said with respect to his own translation practice: "on Tuesday it might be 'perhaps' and on Thursday it could be 'maybe'."
Moreover, there cannot be such a thing as the definitive interpretation, or for that matter, a definitive translation of a literary work. With a few exceptions, literary criticisms, as well as translations, are subject to the changing psychological and semantic presences of language. In general, translations have to be redone in intervals of thirty years. And we hardly ever read literary criticism that is older than thirty years, unless we go back through the centuries to find those documents that writers have prepared on the art and craft of their own writing.
A performer's and critic's perspective cannot be fully explained, but the act of interpretation is frequently the most vital instrument to bring a text alive for a reader or listener. Even though perspective is inscrutable in itself, the comparative study of perspectives in translation practice can become a valuable tool for the interpretation of literary texts. Generally, the attempt to follow and understand poetic thinking causes most readers the greatest difficulty. Even more critical is the understanding of poems that have been translated from other languages into English, if one takes into consideration that hardly any one single translation does justice to the original source-language poem.
Here the concept of multiple translations becomes an invaluable tool to increase the reader's comprehension of a given poem. Whenever several translations of a poem are available in English, the reader can identify those moments where translators have chosen different word equivalencies for an expression in the original language. It is in those gray zones, those moments of ambiguity of a poem, that the interpretive perspectives of the translator are at work. the translator has recognized that no one single word can fully transplant the word in the original, and therefore certain evaluative decisions have to be made by the translator. Translators have to choose the equivalent that most strongly represents for them the process of poetic thinking that they perceive in the source-language poem. Different translators' decisions will vary according to the translator's overall interpretive perception of the poem. The reader undertakes an increasingly stimulating interpretive approach to the poem through the various translations, since no one translation ultimately succeeds in transferring the entire poem from a foreign language into English. Each choice made by the translator with respect to a particular word enlarges the reader's understanding and experience of the poem. The actual poem, its possible meanings and aesthetic dimensions, resides somewhere between the solutions offered by each individual translator.
No reading of a poem can be more intense than that which proceeds through the study of multiple translations. A short look at several translations of "The Panther" by Rainer Maria Rilke should illuminate this interpretive process. The first two lines of the German read:
Sein Blick is vom Vorübergehen der Stäbeso müd geworden, dass er nichts mehr hält.
Here are several solutions by various translators:
His gaze, from sweeping by the bars, has worn so thin,there's nothing more that it can hold. (John Felstiner)
From seeing the bars, his seeing is so exhausted that itno longer holds anything anymore. (Robert Bly)
His sight, from glancing back and forth across the bars,has grown so weary it catches nothing more. (James L. Dana)
His sight from ever gazing through the bars has grownso blunt that it sees nothing more. (C.F. MacIntyre)
His vision from the passing of the bars is grown so wearythat it holds no more. (M.D. Herter Norton)
The bars have sucked his glance so dry of raging,...(Ludwig Lewisohn)
The German word "Blick" has been rendered by the words gaze, seeing, sight, glance, and vision. Apparently, no exact equivalent is available in English to render the full impact of the German word. All the English words project a common ground of semantic connotations, but each word signals a series of associations that are different from the other. The activity of visualization contained in "glance" is different from that of "vision" and of the other equivalencies that the translators have chosen to capture the magnetic field of "Blick." What makes the translation of the word "Blick" so terribly difficult is the fact that it comprises as word-visualization both a movement and a state of stasis. A person generates a "Blick," a glance that goes from the person to the outside world, and it also expresses the content that is contained in the activity of seeing. None of the English equivalencies can recreate that double image. However, the study of these various translations of "Blick" impart to the reader a sense of the complex interactions that are active in this word. The very fact that each translator has chosen a different word for "Blick heightens the interpretive curiosity.
The comparison of the translations also reveals that Norton's rendering of the first line is distinctly different from the others. He has placed the movement into the bars rather than into the eyes of the panther. He is the only one who has chosen to render that nuance as it is in the original German. Without the presence of the other translations the reader would probably not have noticed this poetic nuance.
The study of a poem through the medium of various translations displays the complex associations of poetic thinking and induces the reader to ask questions about the nature of the poem that otherwise would not have been asked. Out of all these various interpretations, readers can then formulate their own ways of seeing and interpreting the poem. This kind of reading offers an extraordinary richness of perceptions, a living inside the poem, which could rarely be reached by reading just one translation of a given poem.
THE ART AND CRAFT OF TRANSLATION: RE-CREATIVE DYNAMICS IN CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION
By Rainer Schulte
Understanding presupposes interpretation, and interpretation presupposes intense research into the structures of a text or a situation that make understanding possible. Cultural situations, like artistic texts, display very intricate and complex interrelationships that need to be deciphered before any understanding can happen. Interpretation is never finite, and as there are no two words that connote the exact same meaning, there are no two people who come up with an identical interpretation of the same situation. For some time now we have committed the mistake of believing that texts and cultural situations can be reduced to one definitive statement of meaning. The results of that attitude have been disastrous; they have in many cases seriously hampered the interpretation and understanding of cultural phenomena in other countries. In our
attempts to interpret foreign texts and situations, we tend to impose preconceived notions on other cultures, which creates opinions rather than the possibility of dialoguing with the people of another country and language.
Modern technology has pretty much eliminated the barriers of geographical distances in the world. Yet, the disappearance of geographical distances has certainly not improved cultural understanding between the United States and other countries. One might be included to say that the disappearance of geographical boundaries has brought about a deterioration in cross-cultural communication. We humans are not prepared for the shock that we experience when we are suddenly confronted with the web of complex and impenetrable layers in a different culture.
The key word here is "communication." By its very nature, communication is never one-sided; it demands a two-way exchange, a giving and taking. And what better tool to investigate the nature of communication than the art and craft of translation! In its most basic assessment, we can say that ALL ACTS OF COMMUNICATION ARE ACTS OF TRANSLATION. Therefore, it seems most appropriate to investigate the methodologies of the art and craft of translation to reshape and revitalize cross-cultural communication and understanding.
Let me briefly explore the nature of translation as it applies to acts of artistic creation, performance, and interpretation. Artists translate their vision into the possibilities of the respective medium, performers translate their understanding of a work into the possibilities of an instrument, and critics translate their interpretation of a work into the possibilities of verbal expressions. They are all involved in the act of translation. When we begin to approach the texture of another culture, we must translate our perceptions into the frame of verbal expressions, and to achieve that goal, we can use the methodologies derived from the art and craft of literary translation to expand our research into the understanding of a culture that is different from our own.
I reiterate my starting point: "all acts of communication are acts of translation." The dilemma of communication manifests itself not only from one language to another, but also within the boundaries of the same language. C.P. Snow drew our attention to this dilemma when he created the concept of "the two cultures." The scientist cannot communicate with the humanist, since their specialized languages have grown too far apart. Similarly, humanists have difficulties in understanding the languages of their respective disciplines. If we observe the area of literary criticism, we soon become aware of the fact that critics and scholars have developed such a highly specialized language that becomes inaccessible to the intelligent general reader. The language of the critic/scholar in those instances obscures the understanding and interpretation of a text, rather than illuminating it. That dilemma can be extended further to the incompatible languages of two disciplines, and it might be appropriate to look at the study of two different cultures in the same way as we might want to approach the study of two disciplines. Given these difficulties, it is no wonder that we have problems with cross-cultural communication.
The flow from one culture to another (mainly thorough the craft of translation, that is to say through verbal transfer from one language to the other) is far from being satisfactory these days. Rather than exploring the newness, the strangeness, the foreignness of a situation in another culture, we begin to impose--either consciously or unconsciously--our own interpretive prejudices on another culture and its texts. It is here that the translator takes on an important and revitalizing role.
The translator functions on the surface as the transplanter of words from one language to another. However, we know that no total equivalence between languages is possible, as there is no complete equivalence between synonyms. Therefore, the art and craft of translation could be called an activity of approximation: a going back and forth between two cultures, "ein Ubersetzen hinuber und heruber." The translation process is neither source language nor target language: it is something in between.
We can attribute three major functions to the translator:
1. The translator as the carrier of words from one language to another.
2. The translator as an originator of research methods (based on the art and craft of translation) that can help us, the readers, in our efforts to interpret and understand a text and reverse the general tendency toward reducing interpretation to its most common denominator in favor of reconstructing the complexity of a text or a situation;
3. The translator as an agent not only of bilingual expertise, but also as a bicultural expert.
We know that communication from one language to another does not work on the level of mere word-to-word correspondences. We are not translating words, but rather transferring/transplanting situations. The communication process is to transplant the essence of a situation, the emotional and conceptual content, the rhythm of a thought process. Word-for-word translations have never worked. For that very reason, the notion of machine translation has not been very successful in the area of the humanities. However, in order for a translation to be successful several important steps have to be taken to transplant the emotional content of a situation from the source language to a corresponding situation in the target language.
The act of translation can help to re-establish a natural interaction between reader/translator and text. After all, the act of translation is first of all an act of interpretation. The translator cannot afford to think around a text--which is frequently the case with scholars; ;he or she must think through the text, through each word, each sentence, each paragraph. Translators struggle with each word; they must establish a relationship with the magnetic field of each word before they can commit themselves to a possible interpretation of a text. This activity is basically different from the removed scholarly activity.
The act of interpretation precedes the act of translation. And in order to implement a translation, one must ask the question: what do I (as translator) need to know in order to do justice to the text that I am trying to transfer from one language to another? The translator should not impose pre-established outside information on a text, but rather generate his research from within the necessity of the text or the situation. It is the constant interaction with the text that creates an interpretation and furnishes the translator with the necessary means to transfer that interaction into the linguistic structures of another language. Since this natural interaction with the text has been disturbed by the fabrication of a scholarly language that is in no way related to the reflection of a genuine thought process generated by the reading of a text, the critic should look to the translator for the revitalization of his own art.
The activities of the translator and critic are the same to a certain point: the translator reflects his interpretation through the choice of words in the target language; the critic tries to formulate his interpretive insights through the possibilities of critical language. The translator's activity could be called "situational thinking" or "visualization."
Translation research and thinking will prevent the translator from reducing a literary work to one meaning. The translator opens up a variety of meanings, a diversity of possible interpretations anchored in the situation and the context of a text.
A closer look at the translation process will offer methods of research that can be transferred to the study of cross-cultural understanding. Before any interpretation can take place, the translator needs to establish a perspective with respect to the specific situations he or she encounters in the source-language text. How translators establish perspectives can be reconstructed through a close analysis of multiple translations of the same text. Each translation contains the specific imprint of the translator's interpretive vision, which obviously varies from translator to translator. A comparative study of a text that has been translated by more than one person provides us, the reader/critic, with information as to how a translator arrived at the establishment of a particular perspective and whether that perspective was carried out consistently throughout the entire translation.
The question needs to be asked: "What is involved in the translation process?" Through words in themselves acquire meaning only in the context of the sentence, the paragraph, the entire piece, the cultural and historical background. Thus, the research focuses first of all on the "word" itself. We need to "unlearn" words. By this I mean we have to find out what primary and secondary meanings an author has attributed to specific words, since the primary meaning in the mind of the author might not be the primary meaning we associate with the word. The word is never seen in isolation but always in relation to a situational context. Through the art of translation the student (translator/scholar) learns how to establish relationships and interactions. Relationships between words, relationships between the word and its philological and etymological background, relationships between the word and its cultural ambiance, relationships between the word and its historical placement, relationships between the word and its context within a text. It becomes clear that the translation process trains us in
associative thinking. We always see everything in relation to something else, never as isolated phenomena in themselves. Let us retrace the steps that are involved in the act of translation: the reading of the text as a situational visualization leads to the interpretation of the various relationships inherent in the texture of a given work. That activity also reveals the diversity of interrelationships active in a text, which forces the translator as reader/critic to reconstruct the complexity of the textual situations. An understanding and visualization of all these interactions implies that the translator must engage in a decision-making process in order to decide which specific aspects of a textual situation have to be carried from one language into the other. That problem-solving activity is one of the fundamental aspects of interdisciplinary thinking and research.
Through translation the student learns how to cope with diverse, complex structures, how to approach these structures, how to interpret these structures, how to decide which important elements of that structure need to be transferred from the source language into the new situation of another language (as a continuous activity of problem-solving). The translator learns how to think in an associative manner (which leads to coping with complex structures), and how to apply this kind of thinking to the solution of problems. All research then is generated by the necessity of the situation and not by some outside form of information.
Interdisciplinarity could then be defined as the communication between a situation and words, in which the words take an active role in discovering the dynamics of that situation. Discovering leads to understanding, and understanding based on the visualization of a situation initiates the process of finding solutions, whether it be in the realm of translating a text or in the realm of approaching a subject matter from an interdisciplinary point of view.
With specific reference to Germany and the United States, several further activities of the translator in his or her function as cross-cultural communicator should be pointed out. The United States never wanted to be a world power. This was imposed on the people of the United States after World War II and found most Americans not only unprepared, but also unwilling to adapt to this new situation. However, English was declared the world language, not German.Thus, we have to make special efforts from the German side to continue the transferral of the German heritage. That heritage competes with the heritage and language of south American and other countries. The German language is only one among many. The teaching of German language, culture, and history at most American colleges has reached an all-time low, which can, to a great extent, be attributed to the insufficient training of teachers of German. On both sides, we have not learned how to explore, study, and interpret cultural situations the way the translator approaches a text. In many cases, we exchange opinions and prejudices, which hardly ever contribute to the opening of a genuine dialogue. Another statistical figure might explain why the flow of cross-cultural exchanges between Germany and the United States is quite uneven. Germany publishes approximately 3900 translation titles from English into German in the area of literature every year; in America the total number of translations in the literary field from all languages into
English is 1800 per year. And in many cases, the works that are being translated are not necessarily those that should be translated. Here the educated and well-oriented translator should become active as a cross-cultural communicator.
Thus, from the translator's perspective, we need people who are not only bilingual, but also bicultural. The art and craft of translation can serve as the training ground for bicultural experts. What we need are people who stand in both cultures at the same time, so that they can open the channels of communication because of their knowledge of the culture. They can perceive sameness in the differences, they can become the consultants to publishers, they can prevent the enormous distortions of "image' perception on both sides of the Atlantic.
The previous comments convey a very sketchy outline of the possibilities inherent in the methodologies of translation to promote intercultural communication. Research that responds to the need of translation activities is always of an inter-disciplinary nature. On that assumption, and also on the premise that all acts of communication are acts of translation, we decided that the most appropriate way to promote cross-cultural communication and education at the university level was to initiate an interdisciplinary program based on the methodologies derived from the art and craft of translation. Such a program has been started at the University of Texas at Dallas with the continuous support of the National Endowment for the Humanities. Some of these new ideas are also reflected in the pages of Translation Review, which started publication in 1978 and serves as a forum for new research into the field of translation theory and practice as a means to improve cross-cultural communication.
In conclusion, I would like to summarize the important role that the translator will play in the future as the mediator between cultures.
1. The translator functions as the transplanter of text situations from one language to another. Since there are no exact equivalencies between either words or cultural situations, the translator engages in a continuous activity of inter-relating aspects of one culture with those of another. The process of learning initiated by the translator is geared toward a recognition of the differences inherent in cultures, differences of perception and interpretation. The translation process reconfirms the importance of studying the complexities underlying any cultural pattern.
2. Methodologies derived from the art and craft of translation are valuable tools toward the development of interdisciplinary thinking, an absolute prerequisite for any cross-cultural research. Furthermore, the study of translation and the reconstruction of the translation process can revitalize the way we reflect our interpretive perceptions of a literary text through the possibilities of critical and scholarly language. The craft of translation always links the practice with the theory. And translation research promotes the comparative study of multiple translations, which give us a sense of how different cultural perspectives can be approached and understood.
3. Translation studies can become a fertile ground for bi-cultural training, so the translator will serve as a valuable expert on cultural patterns and perceptions that could serve publishers and other agencies in their attempts to promote inter-cultural understanding.
Translators perceive their activities as a dialogue with the text, with the other culture, and not as an exchange of opinions and preconceived judgments. As we have pointed out, inter-cultural communication depends on dialogue, an activity that is continuously undergoing change. Translations research makes us, the translators, critics, and scholars, feel comfortable with complex situations that are always in the process of changing. Thus, the methodologies derived from the art and craft of translation can be considered a vital tool in the reshaping of our educational future toward a better understanding of cross-cultural exchanges.
21.01
Essays on Interdisciplinary Studies
Table of Contents: Interdisciplinary Articles
Jacques Barzun. FOOD FOR THE NRF
Jacques Barzun. SCHOLARSHIP VERSUS CULTURE
Saul Bellow. LITERATURE IN THE AGE OF TECHNOLOGY
William Bennett. The Humanities, The Universities, and Public Policy
Allan Bloom. OUR LISTLESS UNIVERSITIES
Norman Cantor. THE REAL CRISIS IN THE HUMANITIES TODAY
Fritjof Capra. THE TURNING POINT: A NEW VISION OF REALITY
Alvin C. Eurich. IDEAS - THE KEY TO INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES
Stanley Fish. BEING INTERDISCIPLINARY IS SO VERY HARD TO DO
Charles Frankel. WHY THE HUMANITIES?
Jerry G. Gaff. INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Hugh Kenner. LIBRARIES AND GLOWLAMPS: A STRATEGY OF REASSURANCE
Nabokov. GOOD READERS AND GOOD WRITERS
Octavio Paz. TRANSLATION: LITERATURE AND LETTERS
John C. Sawhill. THE UNLETTERED UNIVERSITY: Degrading the Liberal Arts on
Campus
William D. Schaefer. STILL CRAZY AFTER ALL THESE YEARS:
Alan D. Sokal. TRANSGRESSING THE BOUNDARIES:TOWARD A TRANSFORMATIVE HERMENEUTICS OF QUANTUM GRAVITY
Tamara Swora and James L. Morrison. INTERDISCIPLINARITY AND HIGHER
EDUCATION
22.01
COLLECTION OF POEMS
Margaret AtwoodThis Is A Photograph of Me
W.S. MerwinIn Autumn
William Carlos Williams NANTUCKET
Wallace Stevens DISILLUSIONMENT OF TEN O'CLOCK
WALLACE STEVENSThirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird
Archibald MacLeishArs Poetica
23.01
Nobel Prize Winners in Literature
1901 René F. A. Sully-Prudhomme, France 1902 Theodor Mommsen, Germany1903 Bjornstjerne Bjornson, Norway1904 Frédéric Mistral, France José Echegaray, Spain1905 Henryk Sienkiewicz, Poland1906 Giosuè Carducci, Italy1907 Rudyard Kipling, Great Britain1908 Rudolf C. Eucken, Germany1909 Selma Lagerlöf, Sweden1910 Paul J. Heyse, Germany1911 Maurice Maeterlinck, Belgium1912 Gerhart Hauptmann, Germany1913 Rabindranath Tagore, India1914 No award1915 Romain Rolland, France1916 Verner von Heidenstam, Sweden1917 Karl A. Gjellerup, Denmark Henrik Pontoppidan, Denmark1918 No award1919 Carl F. G. Spitteler, Switzerland1920 Knut Hamsun, Norway1921 Anatole France, France1922 Jacinto Benavente y Martínez, Spain1923 William Butler Yeats, Ireland1924 Wladyslaw S. Reymont, Poland1925 George Bernard Shaw, Great Britain1926 Grazia Deledda, Italy1927 Henri Bergson, France1928 Sigrid Undset, Norway1929 Thomas Mann, Germany1930 Sinclair Lewis, United States1931 Erik Karlfeldt, Sweden1932 John Galsworthy, Great Britain1933 Ivan A. Bunin, U.S.S.R.1934 Luigi Pirandello, Italy1935 No award1936 Eugene O'Neill, United States1937 Roger Martin du Gard, France1938 Pearl S. Buck, United States1939 Frans E. Sillanpää, Finland1940 No award
23.021941 No award1942 No award1943 No award1944 Johannes V. Jensen, Denmark1945 Gabriela Mistral, Chile1946 Hermann Hesse, Switzerland1947 André Gide, France1948 T. S. Eliot, Great Britain1949 William Faulkner, United States1950 Bertrand A. W. Russell, Great Britain1951 Pär F. Lagerkvist, Sweden1952 François Mauriac, France1953 Winston Churchill, Great Britain1954 Ernest Hemingway, United States1955 Halldór K. Laxness, Iceland1956 Juan Ramón Jiménez, Spain1957 Albert Camus, France1958 Boris L. Pasternak, U.S.S.R.1959 Salvatore Quasimodo, Italy1960 Saint-John Perse, France1961 Ivo Andric, Yugoslavia1962 John Steinbeck, United States1963 George Seferis, Greece1964 Jean Paul Sartre, France1965 Mikhail A. Sholokhov, U.S.S.R.1966 Samuel Y. Agnon, Israel Nelly Sachs, Sweden1967 Miguel Angel Asturias, Guatemala1968 Yasunari Kawabata, Japan1969 Samuel Beckett, Ireland1970 Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (Soviet) for his novels.1971 Pablo Neruda (Chilean) for his poems.1972 Heinrich Böll (German) for his novels, short stories, and plays.1973 Patrick White (Australian) for his novels.1974 Eyvind Johnson (Swedish) for his novels and short stories; Harry Edmund Martinson (Swedish) for his essays, plays, novels, and poems.1975 Eugenio Montale (Italian) for his poems.1976 Saul Bellow (U.S.) for his novels.1977 Vicente Aleixandre (Spanish) for his poems.1978 Isaac Bashevis Singer (Polish-born) for his novels and short stories.1979 Odysseus Elytis (Greek) for his poems.1980 Czeslaw Milosz (Polish) for his poems.1981 Elias Canetti (Bulgarian-born) for his fiction and nonfiction.
23.031982 Gabriel García Márquez (Colombian) for his novels and short stories.1983 William Golding (British) for his novels.1984 Jaroslav Seifert (Czech) for his poems.1985 Claude Simon (French) for his novels.1986 Wole Soyinka (Nigerian) for his plays, poems, and novels.1987 Joseph Brodsky (Soviet-born) for his poems.1988 Naguib Mahfouz (Egyptian) for his novels and short stories.1989 Camilo José Cela (Spanish) for his fiction and nonfiction.1990 Octavio Paz (Mexico) for his poems and essays.1991 Nadine Gordimer (South African)1992 Derek Walcott (West Indian)1993 Toni Morrison (American)1994 Kenzaburo Oe (Japanese) 1995 Seamus Heaney 1996199719982000
2001
24.01
List of Writers, Artists, and Composers
Writers
Aichinger, IlseAlbee, Edwardde Andrade, MarioAnouilh, JeanApollinaireArp, HansArtaud, AntoninAuden, W.H.Babel, IsaacBachmann, IngeborgBarth, JohnBarthelme, D.Beckett, SamuelBellow, SaulBenn, GottfriedBergson, Henri L.Berryman, JohnBobrowski, JohannesBöll, HeinrichBonnefoy, YvesBorges, Jorges L.Bosquet, AlainBrecht, BertoldBreton, AndréButor, MichelCabrera Infante, GuillermoCalvino, ItaloCamus, AlbertCarpentier, AlejoCelan, PaulChar, RenéCocteau, JeanCorbière, TristanCortázar, JulioDarío, RubénDostoevsky, FeydorDuras, MargueriteDurrell, Lawrence
24.02Dürrenmatt, FriedrichEich, GünterEliot, T.S.Ellison, RalphEluard, PaulFaulkner, WilliamFlaubert, Gustave (19th century)Follain, JeanFrisch, MaxFuentes, CarlosGarcía Márquez, Gabriel Genet, JeanGhelderode, Michel deGide, AndréGiraudoux, JeanGoll, IvanGorostiza, JoséGrass, GünterGuillén, JorgeGuillevicHochhut, RolfHuxley, AldousJames, HenryJiménez, Juan RamónJoyce, JamesKafka, FranzGalway, KinnellKosinski, JerzyKrolow, KarlLaforgue, JulesLautréamontLawrence, D.H.Lind, JakovLorca, Federico GarcíaLowell, RobertLuzi, MarioMalraux, AndréMann, ThomasMerwin, W.S.Michaux, HenryMiller, ArthurMontale, EugenioMoravia, Alberto
24.03Musil, RobertNabokov, VladimirNeruda, PabloNin, AnaïsOrtega y Gassett, JoséParra, NicanorPavese, CesarePinter, HaroldPiontek, HeinzPirandello, LuigiPound, EzraProust, MarcelPynchon, ThomasReverdy, PierreRilke, Rainer MariaRimbaud, Arthur (19th century)Robbe-Grillet, AlainRoethke, TheodoreRulfo, JuanSarraute, NathalieSartre, Jean-PaulSeferis, GeorgeStevens, WallaceSupervielle, JulesSvevo, ItaloTrakl, GeorgTzara, TristanUnamuno, Miguel deUngaretti, GiuseppeValéry, PaulVargas Llosa, MarioVerlaine, PaulWest, NathanaelVallejo, CésarVoznesensky, AndreyWeiss, PeterWoolf, Virginia
24.04Artists
Albers, JosefAlechinsky Antes, Horst Arp, Jean Bacon, Francis Balla, Giacomo Beuys, Joseph boccioni, Umberto Botero Brancusi, Constantin Braque, Georges Calder, Alexander Chagall, Marc Chirico, Giorgio de Cuevas, Jose LuisDaliDiebenkorn, R.Dubuffet, JeanDuchamp, MarcelErnst, MaxGabo, NaumGiacommeti, AlbertoGris, JuanHundertwasserIpousteguyJohns, JasperKandinsky, WassilyKaprow, AllanKienholz, EdKlee, PaulKooning, Willem deLeger, FernandLissitzky, ElMagritte, ReneMalevich, KasimirManet, EdouardMarisolMatisse, HenriMiro, Joan
24.05Mondrian, PietMonet, ClaudeMoore, HenryMotherwell, R.Munch, EdvardNewman, BarnettOldenburg, ClaesPaike, Nan JunePicabia, FrancisPicasso, PabloPollock, JacksonRauschenberg, RobertRay, ManRothko, Mark Schwitters, KurtSeawright, JamesSeverini, GinoShahn, BenStella, FrankTamayo, RufinoTinguely, JeanWright, Frank Lloyd
Composers
Babbit, Milton Barber, Samuel Barraque, Jean Bartok, Bela Berg, Alban Berio, Luciano Bernstein, Leonard Boulez, Pierre Britten, Benjamin Brown, Earle Busoni, Ferrucio Cage, John Carter, Elliot Copland, Aaron Cowell, Henry Crumb, GeorgeDavidovsky, Mario
24.06Davies, Peter MaxwellDebussy, ClaudeFeldman, MortonFoss, LukasGinastera, AlbertoGlass, PhilipHarris, RoyHenze, Hans WernerHindemith, PaulHonegger, ArthurIves, CharlesJanacek, LeosKagel, MauricioKrenek, Ernestligeti, GyorgyLutoslawski, WitoldMaderna, BrunoMahler, GustavMarinu, BohuslavMayuzumi, ToshiroMessiaen, OlivierMilhaud, DariousMussorgsky, ModestNono, LuigiOrff, CarlPartch, HarryPenderecki, KrzysztofPoulenc, Francispousseur, Henriprokofiev, SegeyRachmaninoff, SergeRavel, MauriceReich, SteveRiley, TerrySallinen, AulisSatie, ErikSchoenberg, ArnoldShostakovitch, DimitryStockhausen, KarlStrauss, RichardStravinsky, IgorTakemitsu, ToruThomson, Virgil
24.07Tippett, MichaelVarese, EdgardWebern, AntonWeil, KurtWuorinen, CharlesXenakis, Iannis
25.01
INTERDISCIPLINARY MINDS
Under Construction
26.01
SCHOLARLY JARGON
BE A LITERARY CRITIC: EARN BIG BUCKS!
By Randolph HoganThe New York Times Book Review-June 4, 1978
27.01
UNIVERSITY AND SMALL PRESSES
28.01
LIBRARY ORIENTATION
29.01
THESIS AND DISSERTATION GUIDELINES
