The Journal of Literary Theory is an English and German Journal that publishes 15-20 articles biannually through a blind peer review process. This journal has been in operation since 2007 and takes into account past perceptions and new developments within the genre of literary theory. The first issues of this journal primarily deal with establishing the field of literary theory as a diverse and changing philosophical ideal pervasive in many languages. Such as in the article “Philosophy and Literature,” (Skilleås) the ongoing debates are indicative of the prevailing nature of literary theory where in many established individuals discuss past conceptions of literary theory and their modern-day implications on the study. In “Cognitive Poetics and Literary Theory” (Stockwell) new studies are changing the way we perceive text acquisition by an audience bringing into question our views on historical literature to this point. “It is argued that stylistics and cognitive poetics have been successful in providing a descriptive account of how readers construct propositional content from literary reading, but they have only recently turned their attention to a correspondingly rigorous analysis of aesthetics and emotional involvement” (Stockwell 135). These themes of the past influences on the climate of modern literary theory are characteristic of this specific journal. Whereas stylistic choices were focused on more in the past, aesthetics and emotional response is now being researched more thoroughly in this journal. Many studies take into account the effects of past philosophy on the current prevailing theories of literature. These ideas are not alien to current events. Articles often discuss the interrelationship of multiple modern-day events with their implicit effects on the current theories surrounding literature.
This journal also takes into account paradoxical views on the nature of literary theory, specifically fiction. “Notes for a(Nother) Theory of Experientiality” and “Law, Tragedy, Spirit: Hölderlin Contra Agamben” (Caracciolo) discuss the paradoxical nature of the individual’s experience compared to the writer’s intention, and how lack of separation between law and violence alters expectation respectively. These issues located in the middle of the current volumes are indicative of a logical shift towards the journal’s modern day more contradictory studies. They often focus on the perceptions of fiction and implicit meaning found at the heart of modern-day writing while also continuing a focus on emotional response, which was stated to have little research in earlier versions. In “The Paradox of Fiction – A Brief Introduction into Recent Developments, Open Questions, and Current Areas of Research, Including a Comprehensive Bibliography from 1975 to 2018” (Konrad) and “Emotion in the Appreciation of Fiction” (Ferran). These modern titles have shifted from establishing concepts within the field to shedding light on social constructions and ideas that motivate individuals to be interested in the genres they enjoy. “The Paradox of Fiction” describes itself as “a collection of essays which deal with this paradox, or, more generally, with problems surrounding fictional emotions. In our brief introduction, we want to pose some questions that we think are still up for debate” (Konrad 193). This journal has many detailed studies regarding the nature of human interest in the realm of literature. Often breaking down concepts and generalizing ideas to explain trends intrinsic to the modern states of fiction and popularity within the populace. These studies generally involve many mediums in which the discussions are elaborated within such as videogames, movies, and other fictional media, however the focus is largely on the reactions to these media rather than the material itself.
This journal as a whole seeks to document and explain perceived trends in fiction by giving historical and social context to its reasoning. These claims are further supported by the posting of controversy and responses at the end of each journal entry. These discussions are often written by scholars responding to some of the larger questions posed by each issue of The Journal of Literary Theory. However, it is of note to mention that these additions to the text often raise more question than they answer. Putting monkey wrenches in the established logic of other writers. These inconsistencies, arguably, are at the heart of literary theory. In “A Strange Discussion: ›Ethical Criticism‹” in vol 6 no.1 by Michael Titzmann, he criticizes the nature of individuals creating meaning in a text, and how that subjectivity effects criticism and its ethicality based on personal bias. It seems, with this knowledge, that with each new addition to the journal; ideas are expanded upon in an inconsistent fashion. Tending towards a general method of thought regarding emotional response rather than objective truth when discussing various forms of media. This, by nature, creates discrepancies in the logic of published works, however this is not negative. The concepts and ideas proposed by these conflicts often shed light on deeper truth that prevails within the research. Inspiring new articles to pick up where the previous issues left off.
So, to conclude, the nature of literary theory as proposed by this journal is not a concrete reality. It changes often by the lens and scope in which scenarios are viewed; within the realm of aesthetic and emotional response it is found that their nature is as to be expected, subjective creating some seeming inconsistencies in response. However, this journal does an exceptional job of postulating new ideas involving literature, and if nothing else inspires creativity in the minds of its viewership. This journal isn’t accessible through TTU unfortunately. I gained access from a friend at TSU, so if you know anyone from Tennessee State University, that is willing to share their school login, they have full access to this journal.
Works Cited
Caracciolo, Marco. “Notes for a(Nother) Theory of Experientiality.” Journal of Literary Theory, vol. 6, no. 1, 2012, pp. 41-64.
Cooper, Ian. “Law, Tragedy, Spirit: Hölderlin Contra Agamben.” Journal of Literary Theory, vol. 6, no. 1, 2012, pp. 195-212.
Ferran, Íngrid Vendrell. “Emotion in the Appreciation of Fiction.” Journal of Literary Theory, vol. 12, no. 2, Mar. 2018, pp. 204–223.
Konrad, Eva-Maria, et al. “The Paradox of Fiction – A Brief Introduction into Recent Developments, Open Questions, and Current Areas of Research, Including a Comprehensive Bibliography from 1975 to 2018.” Journal of Literary Theory, vol. 12, no. 2, Mar. 2018, pp. 193–203.
“MLA International Bibliography: EBSCO.” EBSCO Information Services, Inc. Www.ebsco.com, https://www.ebsco.com/products/research-databases/mla-international- bibliography.
Skilleås, Ole Martin. “Philosophy and Literature” Journal of Literary Theory, vol. 1, no. 1, 2007, 45-60.
Stockwell, Peter. “Cognitive Poetics and Literary Theory.” Journal of Literary Theory, vol. 1, no. 1, 2007, pp. 135-152.
Titzmann, Michael. “A Strange Discussion: ›Ethical Criticism‹.” Journal of Literary Theory, vol.6, no. 1, 2012, pp. 279-286.
English Research Sources 