• Current
• Archives
• Log In
• Register
• Announcements
• About JLT Articles
• For Authors

Home > Vol 13, No 2 (2019) > Schröter

Julian Schröter

Gattungsgeschichte und ihr Gattungsbegriff am Beispiel der Novelle

(Abstract)

Full-length article in: JLT 13/2 (2019), 227–257.

The discussion of genre theory since the middle of the twentieth century has been marked, among other things, by two conflicting endeavors: on the one hand, there are attempts to semantically regulate generic terms for the purpose of a clear scientific language by defining them as types of texts (cf. Fricke 2010, Fishelov 1991, Zymner 2003); and on the other hand, there are attempts to accustom literary studies to the factual indeterminacy of generic terms and to comprehend this indeterminacy by adapting Wittgenstein’s concept of family resemblance or the semantics of prototypes (cf. Strube 1986, Hempfer 2010a). The essay is intended to show that both positions – that of strictly regulating and of merely descriptively comprehending practice – as they have been advocated so far hinder the foundation of genre-historical research. This essay aims to more precisely formulate the productive ideas from both positions and thus to provide a robust foundation for the historical study of genres. This foundation is to be structured by two core questions that until now have not been clearly separated: first, how one ought to define, before and during historiographic and empirical work, the concept of the genre that is to be examined; and second, how one can synthesize the historically changing semantics of a genre at the end of this empirical work. Answering these two questions becomes a problem when one is dealing with historically discontinuous and heterogeneous genres. This essay pursues this problem using the example of novella history, because research here is particularly divided as to how the concept of the novella can best be understood.

The guiding idea of the essay is to reverse the usual sequence of steps: in genre theory, the dogma is often advocated that the concept of genre must be defined a priori, i. e., before the investigation begins and independently of empirical work. The first section of this essay rejects this dogma and recommends that we make the use of the concept of a specific genre dependent on the concrete epistemological interest of the investigation. With the help of an argument by Kendall L. Walton, the essay shows that aesthetic innovations and the historical development of literary procedures can only be understood if a hermeneutic interest in the references of individual texts to historically established generic expectations is at the forefront of the investigation (cf. Walton 1970). The essay recommends that generic historiography serve this hermeneutic interest.

It aims to answer the first core question of how the concept of genre ought be used before and during historiographic work for two central procedures: for reconstruction from, on the one hand, historical poetics (second section); and, on the other hand, from text groups (third section). In both procedures, the thesis is that the concept of the genre to be examined should not be regulated before or independently of empirical work by defining a concept of a text type. In the case of the reconstruction of generic expectations from text groups, one is therefore dependent on a variant of the so-called inductive procedure. In order to rid the inductive method of its methodological deficiencies, the article reformulates this method in terms of quantity theory in such a way that the procedure fulfills the essential requirements. The problem with the inductive procedure is that, in the case of inconsistent historical use of names for genres, it is not suitable for inferring generic characteristics from text groups. This problem is particularly pronounced with novellas, because the texts historically referred to as novellas seem to have only one thing in common, namely, that they have been referred to as novellas. The set-theoretical reformulation of the inductive procedure should allow the reconstruction of the generic expectations historically associated with the name of the genre by making use of classificatory predicates. However, it is not the concept of genre that this procedure aims to determine prior to historiographic work. Rather, the aim is to relate the set of texts that were communicated as novellas in the relevant historical situation to classificatory sets by means of intersections. Each of these intersections – for example, the intersection of the texts referred to as novellas and of fictional journal prose – can be described with regard to the relevant text characteristics of the defined set (for example, fictional journal prose). It is important not to summarily define such intersections as novellas, as is often done. Such a definition would result in a classificatory concept of the respective genre, which in turn would no longer be suitable for comprehending the historical use of the generic label and hence the semantics of a genre in historical literary communication. This essay thus provides an operationalizable reconstruction of the intuition, only vaguely formulated in genre theory so far, that in conducting research one must mediate between inductive and deductive procedures, between being oriented toward the material and reflecting on systematic concepts (cf. Hempfer 1973, 128 sqq., Mueller 2010).

The fourth and final section of the essay seeks to answer the second key question of how to move from heterogeneous empirical findings to a concept of genre that brings these findings together. This question is divided into two subquestions. On the one hand, the question arises as to how the connection between factual and conceptual history can be conceived: whether such a connection exists cannot, this essay argues, be decided on the basis of genre theory. Rather, this is a problem of conceptual and factual history that can only be solved hermeneutically. Two different genre understandings are connected in terms of conceptual history only if the later conception is meaningful for the earlier conception. They are not connected by a concept of text type that has been previously defined quasi as a substance. On the other hand, the question arises as to the concrete cases of literary application for which the results of a history of genre should be integrated into a single concept of genre. These are primarily acts of interpretation and codifying mediations of knowledge, in which generic knowledge becomes manageable in being comprehended by generic concepts that are as simple as possible. However, formulating generic knowledge in terms of concepts is principally associated with a loss of historical accuracy. In order to avoid returning to historically inadequate concepts of genres, the essay develops a model in which a concept of family resemblance oriented toward Wittgenstein and already roughly transferred, by Strube, to genre theory is specified and differentiated with historical indexes (cf. Strube 1986). The essay argues that such a specific concept of genre is most likely to serve the initially developed hermeneutic interest and, at the present stage of theory elaboration, represents the best compromise between historical accuracy and practical applicability.

References

Arx, Bernhard von, Novellistisches Dasein. Spielraum einer Gattung in der Goethezeit, Zürich 1953.

Aust, Hugo, Novelle [1990], Stuttgart ⁵2012.

Baßler, Moritz, Interpretation und Gattung, in: Rüdiger Zymner (Hg.), Handbuch Gattungstheorie, Stuttgart/Weimar 2010, 54–56.

Degering, Thomas, Kurze Geschichte der Novelle, München 1994.

Derrida, Jacques, Das Gesetz der Gattung [1980], in: J.D., Gestade [Parages, 1986], hg. von Peter Engelmann, übers. von Monika Buchgeister, Wien 1994, 245–284.

Dücker, Burckhard, Vorbereitende Bemerkungen zu Theorie und Praxis einer performativen Literaturgeschichtsschreibung, in: Friederike Elias et al. (Hg.), Praxeologie. Beiträge zur interdisziplinären Reichweite praxistheoretischer Ansätze in den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften, Berlin/Boston 2014, 97–128.

Dutt, Carsten, Historische Semantik als Begriffsgeschichte. Theoretische Grundlagen und paradigmatische Anwendungsfelder, in: Jörg Riecke (Hg.), Historische Semantik, Berlin/Bosten 2011, 37–50.

Elias, Friederike et al. (Hg.), Praxeologie. Beiträge zur interdisziplinären Reichweite praxistheoretischer Ansätze in den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften, Berlin/Boston 2014.

Fishelov, David, Genre Theory and Family Resemblance – Revisited, Poetics 20:2 (1991), 123–138.

Føllesdal, Dagfinn, Hermeneutics and the Hypothetico-Deductive Method, Dialectica 33:3–4 (1979), 319–336.

Freund, Winfried, Novelle, Stuttgart 2009.

Fricke, Harald, Norm und Abweichung, München 1981.

Fricke, Harald, Definitionen und Begriffsformen, in: Rüdiger Zymner (Hg.), Handbuch Gattungstheorie, Stuttgart/Weimar 2010, 7–10.

Füllmann, Rolf, Einführung in die Novelle, Darmstadt 2010.

Gabriel, Gottfried, Definitionen und Interessen, Stuttgart 1972.

Garrido Miñambres, Germán, Die Novelle im Spiegel der Gattungstheorie, Würzburg 2009.

Greiner, Bernhard, Kleists Dramen und Erzählungen, Tübingen et al. 2000.

Gymnich, Marion, Gegenstände und Gegenstandskonstitution der Gattungsgeschichtsschreibung, in: Rüdiger Zymner (Hg.), Handbuch Gattungstheorie, Stuttgart/Weimar 2010, 142–145.

Gymnich, Marion/Birgit Neumann, Vorschläge für eine Relationierung verschiedener Aspekte und Dimensionen des Gattungskonzepts: Der Kompaktbegriff Gattung, in: M.G./B.N./Ansgar Nünning (Hg.), Gattungstheorie und Gattungsgeschichte, Trier 2007, 31–52.

Gymnich, Marion/Birgit Neumann/Ansgar Nünning (Hg.), Gattungstheorie und Gattungsgeschichte, Trier 2007.

Hempfer, Klaus W., Gattungstheorie. Information und Synthese, München 1973.

Hempfer, Klaus W., Zum begrifflichen Status der Gattungsbegriffe: Von ›Klassen‹ zu ›Familienähnlichkeiten‹ und ›Prototypen‹, Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 120:1 (2010), 14–32 (Hempfer 2010a).

Hempfer, Klaus W., Generische Allgemeinheitsgrade, in: Rüdiger Zymner (Hg.), Handbuch Gattungstheorie, Stuttgart/Weimar 2010, 15–19 (Hempfer 2010b).

Himmel, Hellmuth, Geschichte der deutschen Novelle, Bern/München 1963.

Kiefer, Sascha, Die deutsche Novelle im 20. Jahrhundert, Köln/Weimar/Wien 2010. 

Klein, Johannes, Geschichte der deutschen Novelle von Goethe bis zur Gegenwart [1954], Wiesbaden ⁴1960.

Kunz, Josef, Die deutsche Novelle im 19. Jahrhundert, Berlin 1970.

Lukas, Wolfgang, Novellistik, in: Hansers Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur, Bd. 5: Zwischen Restauration und Revolution 1815–1848, hg. von Gert Sautermeister/Ulrich Schmid, München 1998, 251–280.

Martus, Steffen, Wandernde Praktiken »after theory«?, Internationales Archiv für Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur 40:1 (2015), 177–195.

Meyer, Reinhart, Novelle und Journal, Bd. 1: Titel und Normen: Untersuchungen zur Terminologie der Journalprosa, zu ihren Tendenzen, Verhältnissen und Bedingungen, Stuttgart 1987.

Meyer, Reinhart, Novelle und Journal, in: Hansers Sozialgeschichte der deutschen Literatur, Bd. 5: Zwischen Restauration und Revolution 1815–1848, hg. von Gert Sautermeister/Ulrich Schmid, München 1998, 234–250.

Müller, Ralph, Korpusbildung, in: Rüdiger Zymner (Hg.), Handbuch Gattungstheorie, Stuttgart/Weimar 2010, 23–25.

Neumann, Michael, Dresdner Novellen, in: Claudia Stockinger/Stefan Scherer (Hg.), Ludwig Tieck. Leben – Werk – Wirkung, Berlin/Boston 2011, 551–567.

Neumann, Birgit/Ansgar Nünning, Einleitung: Probleme, Aufgaben und Perspektiven der Gattungstheorie und Gattungsgeschichte, in: Marion Gymnich/B.N./A.N. (Hg.), Gattungstheorie und Gattungsgeschichte, Trier 2007, 1–28.

Pawłowski, Tadeusz, Begriffsbildung und Definition, Berlin/New York 1980.

Polheim, Karl Konrad, Novellentheorie und Novellenforschung. Ein Forschungsbericht, Stuttgart 1965.

Polheim, Karl Konrad, Gattungsproblematik, in: K.K.P. (Hg.), Handbuch der deutschen Erzählung, Düsseldorf 1981, 9–16.

Popper, Karl, Logik der Forschung [1934], Tübingen ¹⁰2002.

Rabinowitz, Peter J., Before Reading. Narrative Conventions and the Politics of Interpretation, Ithaca, NY 1987.

Raible, Wolfgang, Was sind Gattungen? Eine Antwort aus semiotischer und textlinguistischer Sicht, Poetica 12:3–4 (1980), 320–349.

Rath, Wolfgang, Die Novelle. Konzept und Geschichte [2000], Göttingen ²2008.

Richter, Steffen/Jochen Vogt, Novelle, in: Einladung zur Literaturwissenschaft. Ein Vertiefungsprogramm zum Selbststudium, Duisburg, Essen 2009, http://www.einladung-zur-literaturwissenschaft.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=230%3A5-5-novelle&catid=40%3Akapitel-5&Itemid=53 (20.01.2019) 

Ryan, Marie L., Introduction: On the Why, What, and How of Generic Taxonomy, Poetics 10: 2–3 (1981), 109–126.

Schröder, Rolf, Novelle und Novellentheorie in der frühen Biedermeierzeit, Tübingen 1970.

Schurz, Gerhard, Das Problem der Induktion, in: Herbert Keuth (Hg.), Karl Popper: Logik der Forschung [1998], Berlin ⁴2013, 25–40.

Strube, Werner, Sprachanalytisch-philosophische Typologie literaturwissenschaftlicher Begriffe, in: Christian Wagenknecht (Hg.), Zur Terminologie der Literaturwissenschaft, Stuttgart 1986, 35–49.

Voßkamp, Wilhelm, Gattungen als literarisch-soziale Institutionen, in: Walter Hinck/Alexander von Bormann (Hg.), Textsortenlehre – Gattungsgeschichte, Heidelberg 1977, 27–44.

Voßkamp, Wilhelm, Interdisziplinarität in den Geisteswissenschaften (am Beispiel einer Forschungsgruppe zur Funktionsgeschichte der Utopie), in: Jürgen Kocka (Hg.), Interdisziplinarität. Praxis – Herausforderung – Ideologie, Frankfurt a.M. 1987, 92–104.

Voßkamp, Wilhelm/Herbert Jaumann (Hg.), Johann Wolfang Goethe,Sämtliche Werke, Briefe, Tagebücher, Bd. 9, Abt. 1:Wilhelm Meisters theatralische Sendung, Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre, Unterhaltungen deutscher Ausgewanderten, Frankfurt a.M. 1992.

Walton, Kendall L., Categories of Art, Philosophical Review 79:3 (1970), 334–367.

Zymner, Rüdiger, Gattungstheorie. Probleme und Positionen der Literaturwissenschaft, Paderborn 2003.

2019-10-27

JLTonline ISSN 1862-8990

Copyright © by the author. All rights reserved.
This work may be copied for non-profit educational use if proper credit is given to the author and JLTonline.
For other permission, please contact JLTonline.

Copyright © 2007 – present JLTonline

Contact Webmaster