Structuralism

by Jacques Ehrmann (Editor)

This is the mass market paperback rendition of Yale French Studies 36/37 (1966) edited by Ehrmann.

264 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1966

Reviews

[Jimmy Cline · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was basically one of your average bargain theory books. At this point anything that hasn't been reprinted since 1970 probably doesn't serve as a great introduction to whatever subject matter it is covering. But...what the hell, it was a quick read and it contained some decent essays. I particularly enjoyed the essay on Merleau-Ponty, a thinker who, when one reads about, subsequently finds it irresistible to put off reading any longer. A selection from Claude Levi-Strauss's the Raw and the Cooked serves as the most clever editing decision. Also, a shining example of how structuralism is the sort of theoretical discipline that can, nay, is intended to be utilized across a broad spectrum of subject matter. He is another author that I cannot wait to read. Even the excerpt from the Insistence of the Letter in the Unconscious was a perfectly lucid example of Lacan (because I've never noticed him to be).

The second half drags a lot, and this is probably because it contains most of the Structuralist lit-criticism stuff. The structural symmetry of Corneille's Cinna is analyzed through the use of various diagrams displaying how the plot, combined with character motivation can work in a cyclical way, thus making the actions of each character sort of universally the same. Aside from this, there is also an essay concerning Baudelaire, poetic structure, and a whole lot of semantics. The obvious problem that I found with the last two is that both writers seem to assume that the average reader of this collection of essays on the subject of Structuralism has a comprehensive understanding of French syntax (which I certainly do not (would like to though)). The very last essay was actually sort of funny. Basically, a group of anthropologist martians kidnap a harlequin (?, I know right). In order to gain a more sufficient understanding of human life they ask her what the difference between literature and books is. Not a bad approach, but far from subtle. She replies in true linguistic structuralist fashion, describing the elements or aspects of literature that books have that might make them literature, as well aspects of the book that might make it an example of literature. It's similar to a grade school teacher attempting to teach their students about Marxism using elementary math and examples of apples and oranges.

I'm not even sure why I read this thing. It's obviously dated, the spine broke in half almost immediately upon finishing it, and I spent most of my time half-interestedly reading it while sitting on a bar stool (which in a major way accounts for my vague recollections here). I don't know. Read it? Don't read it? Who cares.

[Duncan Berry · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was my first encounter with German Strukturforschung, and led me to learn German so I could read Alois Riegl and the later Vienna School of Art History in the original German. In this sense, it was a pivotal book for me insofar as it helped me understand what I could do to remove some of my vast ignorance by learning another language.

Sheldon Nodelman's essay was a groundbreaking effort and remained, along with Meyer Schapiro's 1936 essay on the Vienna School, the only discussion of structuralism in the visual arts until the release of Christopher Woods' outstanding collection The Vienna School Reader: Politics And Art Historical Method In The 1930s.

Of course, the Austro-German approach emerged from entirely different philosophical roots from the French variant, and this matter was surprisingly left undiscussed by the contributors of this volume.

The Lacan essay was, as far as I understand, the first English translation of his work. I have always found it amazing that Lacan was a dedicated and enthusiastic reader of Silvan Tomkins, a fact that makes me consider returning to the thicket of Lacan's theory-drenched prose perhaps one more time.

At any rate, Nodelman's essay alone is worth the price of admission here: a first-rate mind discussing an area of immense interest and significance.

I'm still curious, after thirty years, about the contribution of Guido Kaschnitz von Weinberg, and hope to dip into some of his shorter writings on Struktur in the near future.

[Ben Kearvell · Rating 2 out of 5]

A few good essays here but overall the selection seems random and lacks the cohesion you might expect from an entry-level text. Who cares? I got it from the library.