What do you think?
Rate this book
The Flowers of Tarbes: or, Terror in Literature
Paulhan's seminal work in English for the first time
Les Fleurs de Tarbes, ou la terreur dans les lettres, first published as a single volume in 1941, was considered by Jean Paulhan to be the furthest-reaching expression of his thinking about literature and language. It is now recognized as a landmark text in the history of twentieth century literary criticism and in the emergence of contemporary literary theory. This is the first time it has been translated into English.
The playful tone and quirky, casual style of Paulhan's writing mask a theoretical intent and seriousness of purpose that are extraordinarily prescient. In The Flowers of Tarbes Paulhan probes the relationship between language, meaning, context, intention and action with unremitting tenacity, and in so doing produces a major treatise on the nature of the literary act, and a meditation on what we might now call the responsibility or ethical imperative of literature itself.
Les Fleurs de Tarbes, ou la terreur dans les lettres, first published as a single volume in 1941, was considered by Jean Paulhan to be the furthest-reaching expression of his thinking about literature and language. It is now recognized as a landmark text in the history of twentieth century literary criticism and in the emergence of contemporary literary theory. This is the first time it has been translated into English.
The playful tone and quirky, casual style of Paulhan's writing mask a theoretical intent and seriousness of purpose that are extraordinarily prescient. In The Flowers of Tarbes Paulhan probes the relationship between language, meaning, context, intention and action with unremitting tenacity, and in so doing produces a major treatise on the nature of the literary act, and a meditation on what we might now call the responsibility or ethical imperative of literature itself.
109 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1936
About the author
Jean Paulhan
209 books15 followersJean Paulhan était un écrivain, traducteur littéraire et éditeur français. De 1925 à mi-1940 et de 1953 à 1968 il a dirigé La Nouvelle Revue française (NRF), la principale revue littéraire d'Europe de cette période.
Jean Paulhan was a French writer, literary translator and editor. From 1925 to 1940 an from 1953 to 1968 he was the editor of La Nouvelle Revue française (NRF), the leading literary magazine from this period in Europe.
Jean Paulhan was a French writer, literary translator and editor. From 1925 to 1940 an from 1953 to 1968 he was the editor of La Nouvelle Revue française (NRF), the leading literary magazine from this period in Europe.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 21, 2023
Réflexion fascinante mais parfois un peu obscure sur le poids de la tradition, la recherche de l’originalité et le rôle du langage, de la rhétorique et des conventions génériques dans la littérature post-romantique. A méditer…
May 10, 2019
A unique book in which Paulhan himself admits he didn't expect the book to end up the way it does. Paulhan's text develops as you read it. My interpretation of the text was that Paulhan is essentially a kind of meta-literary criticism, in that he criticizes literary critics as well as authors. He makes a distinction between "Terror" and "Rhetoric".
Rhetoric seems to be cliches: sentences, stanzas, entire texts that seem to possess a banality that is ruthlessly attacked by the "Terrorist writer". Terror seems to be (as Paulhan says) "a way of doing things", that is, writing. The Terrorist writer wants to purify and cleanse all writing of cliches and strive for originality at all costs, sacrificing everything in order to obtain this. Paulhan also asserts that the Terrorist "reduces language to thought".
Paulhan seems to be on the "side" of Rhetoric, claiming that a lot of people still find emotional resonance in the banality of phrases, and I got the sense that the Terrorist writers' goal was ultimately impossible. But Paulhan has his criticisms of Rhetoric as well, which ultimately leads him down a thorny path in which one suspects Paulhan is becoming a kind of Terrorist - I think this is what leads him to the last sentence of the book in which he states to pretend he has said nothing at all.
Packed inside this small, dense yet readable book are very good concepts about language vis-a-vis literature. It sort of reminds me of a continuation of Saussure and a proto-Late Wittgenstein, but admittedly I know very little about either.
I think one flaw is that this is not a book that really criticizes texts outside of France; it is pretty much a meta-critique of French literature/literary criticism. I think the only non-French author he refers to is Joyce, and it isn't often. But I don't think Paulhan intended it to be anything more - in fact, it seems like the book escaped his grasp. But in the end, like Paulhan states, the "novel always catches up with itself"....
Rhetoric seems to be cliches: sentences, stanzas, entire texts that seem to possess a banality that is ruthlessly attacked by the "Terrorist writer". Terror seems to be (as Paulhan says) "a way of doing things", that is, writing. The Terrorist writer wants to purify and cleanse all writing of cliches and strive for originality at all costs, sacrificing everything in order to obtain this. Paulhan also asserts that the Terrorist "reduces language to thought".
Paulhan seems to be on the "side" of Rhetoric, claiming that a lot of people still find emotional resonance in the banality of phrases, and I got the sense that the Terrorist writers' goal was ultimately impossible. But Paulhan has his criticisms of Rhetoric as well, which ultimately leads him down a thorny path in which one suspects Paulhan is becoming a kind of Terrorist - I think this is what leads him to the last sentence of the book in which he states to pretend he has said nothing at all.
Packed inside this small, dense yet readable book are very good concepts about language vis-a-vis literature. It sort of reminds me of a continuation of Saussure and a proto-Late Wittgenstein, but admittedly I know very little about either.
I think one flaw is that this is not a book that really criticizes texts outside of France; it is pretty much a meta-critique of French literature/literary criticism. I think the only non-French author he refers to is Joyce, and it isn't often. But I don't think Paulhan intended it to be anything more - in fact, it seems like the book escaped his grasp. But in the end, like Paulhan states, the "novel always catches up with itself"....
January 25, 2025
Non honnête c'était chiant
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews