Is the golden age of literary theory over? Will there ever again

Was reading Ricouer the other day. Couldn't find any value to it, thoufv I forced myself to finish the booke

>>8647210
I have time and narrative vol 3 sitting on my shelf, can anyone chime in on if it's worth reading? The introduction was good

>>8647210
haven't read him so far.
what's his point?

>>8647172
>Literature
>Theory

Implying literature isn't just putting a bunch of well looking words together to tell a story.

Lol, stem fag here and I always get a kick out of you lit girls talking "theory" or "applied ethics" fucking hilarious

>>8648784
that's genre fiction.

literary theory is a form of philosophy, which means:

* nobody will ever agree with anyone about any aspect of it

* everyone will make up words to describe philosophical concepts that they can pretend have something to do with literature (here, have a fucking rhizome already)

* none of it will matter because nobody reads that shit, except perhaps Samuel Delany.

>>8647172
>Is the golden age of literary theory over?
Yeah, probably. There's still ecocriticism, though.

File: 51v5JkTHTyL.jpg (50KB, 325x500px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 325x500px

Has anyone read Blanchot, particularly The Space of Literature?

The way his thought proceeds almost entirely by paradox is hard to get into. I think you have to realise he's not talking about cause and effect (i.e. what are the conditions that bring about literature) but this weird kind of paradoxical simultaneity of causes and effects. I guess that's what the incomprehensible phrase 'the time of time's absence' means.

The stuff he says about the psychological experience of literary creation, though, especially in the section on Kafka, makes a lot of sense even without getting your head into his mind-numbing paradoxical space. Recommend for anyone into the relationship between writing and experience.

>>8647172
Can you explain exactly what there is to miss about the golden age of theory?

>>8647172
Bloom's texts are fairly new.

>>8647172
bourgeois wankery. the dialectic rolls on. sorry you're so attached to one method of evaluating a facet of human expression that is always reinventing itself (as a rule).

The mills of the gods grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine.

>>8647172
I think literary theory ended with Foucault and the death of the author. How can there ever be a consensus if everyone is right?

>>8649634
Lol, please read Foucault again if that's really the message you get from his criticism.