28-04-2014, 14:23PrintWith the system-theoretical literature (also: system-theoretically oriented literature) it concerns that branch of the contemporary literature-sociological discourse which connects methodologisch to the premises of the structural-functional sociological system theory of the American society theorist Talcott Parsons (1902-1979) and above all their functional-structural advancement by the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann (1927-1998).
Since the 1990s this has won primarily in Luhmann art-theoretical main work The art of the society (1995) as well as to other art-sociological writings Luhmann going back beginning increasingly in influence and belongs meanwhile, in spite of the partly belonging adoption problems which are not least based on the certainly high abstraction situation of little Luhmann system theory firmly to the canonised continuance of the literature-theoretical method discussion within the literature.
With her extensive Ausblendung psychically of gone to court author's intentions during the production process, to her fundamental renunciation of an analysis of the psychology of the adoption act as well as her relative distance compared with a pure single text exegesis for the purposes of close reading the system-theoretical literature joins on the tradition of the literature theories oriented to context and is added to the literature sociology. Indeed, it is rejected the Widerspiegelungstheorie significant in the literature-sociological tradition of the Marxism as strictly like other forms of the social Determinismus. To her place the non-causal concept of the Emergenz moves.
The system-theoretical literature takes over Luhmann universality claim and is applicable therefore on in principle all literary phenomena. Nevertheless, in the present scientific practise have turned out history of literature, aesthetics, type history and type theory, love story and dear semantics as well as the literature about 1800 as main fields of work, because Luhmann assumes from the fact that around the turn of 18. by the 19th century a conversion of the primary differentiation form of the society of Stratifikation on functional differentiation occurs. However, meanwhile move also increasingly the premodern literature as well as the literary production of the 20th century in the field of vision system-theoretically of inspired literature.
Though the system theory forms own branch within the sociological theory education, however, nevertheless, partial affinities and certain theoretical overlappings exist possibly with the media science, interdiscourse analysis, historical discourse analysis, the field theory as well as other überindividuell to oriented attempts in the cultural sciences.
Up to now work before all Germanist, Anglists as well as Romanisten with the theorems of the system-theoretical literature, above all in the German-speaking space as well as in the Netherlands.
The main exponents of the Bochum model are the Germanists Gerhard Plumpe and Niels Werber. Their programme of a "polykontexturalen literature was developed in the early 1990s years at the Ruhr university of Bochum and is based on the communication-theoretical bases of little Luhmann theory of social systems. Besides, it is tried to transfer conceptual instruments on the literary communication. Besides, the literature system of the functionally differentiated society which finds in Luhmann art sociology only completely on the edge of mention is conceived as autonomous, but not hermetic concluded. With it the Bochum model clearly differs from known literature-theoretical schools placing on Werkimmanenz as for example to the anglo-saxon New Criticism. In the resort on exclusively internal structures the literature system tries to search his non-literary environment on material capable of literature and this in own communication manner, speak the literary works of incorporating.
Increasing need in entertainment within the society originated which led, finally, at the end of the 18th century to the establishment of an autonomous functional system responsible exclusively for this of the literature at which one can look as a subsystem of the art system and this exists till this day.
As the leading difference of literary communication on which all communications are cut system-inside ungainly and canvassers determine the dichotomy interesting / boringly. Besides, It only one side of the leading difference, namely the positive value concerns an asymmetrical preference code, i.e. interesting, is always aimed in general. Within the literature system this means practically that is tried possibly by author's side over and over again anew not to be dull interesting, - of course with different success and in different way, i.e. with different stylistic means. However, besides, the leading difference itself remains always consistently the same and lends to the system an enough measure to internal stability.
However, in spite of the all-embracing cutting on the leading difference disagreement rules interesting / boringly over how the interesting is to be formed specifically poetically. With it the conflict-laden level of the programmes militating in the literature system with each other is demanded. Contradicting attempts of the theoretical reflexion are believed with it about how interesting literary works are to be formed specifically, i.e. it is about how one call the positive value of the preference code of the literature or" program" is able. In the contrast to the stable leading difference of the literature system the literary programmes are put out therefore to a constant change, i.e. it is searched over and over again for new ways, to become interesting or to remain and to dig up, besides, competing attempts on the part of other authors. Besides, the literary works are understood after Luhmann media theory as symbolically generalised communication media.
Ungainly and canvassers define their research program in nuce as follows:
"If the literature is a social system of our society, literature observes all those systems which are in her environment: possibly the economy, the politics or the right. The so discerning and observant literature system must make a distinction with constantly what holds it for able of poetry and what not. This decision is subjected to historical change. Solidly remains with varying subject default, however, the question whether from the environment in the system of the literature promise to imported subjects interesting or dull entertainment. Observations of the literature are interested in this sense primarily in the literary charms of her environment which knows to integrate the literature into texts to reach with it her audience - and not to change possibly the economic or political relations. Such absolutely possible effects of the literature on her environment are additions which are carried out by literature-external observers."
The Bochum model was recently extended by the proposal to estimate a Nebencode (literarily) beside the leading difference interesting / boringly valuable / worthless which is used above all by the literary criticism and draws for the genesis of the secondary medium staff of added author's reputation as well as for the establishment of social memory belonging to system responsibly. Recalling of the constantly growing number of the literary new releases which flood year after year the book market and provide system-inside for a violent profit in information, the literature system needs a selection mechanism which discriminates efficiently between relevant and irrelevant new works. Besides, the vast majority of the new releases is revealed by call of the negative value of the Nebencodes or by nonobservance of the suitable work to forgetting.
With the basic acceptances of the Bochum model also there works the Anglist Christoph Reinfandt of the university of Tübingen. It is for him in particular about one beyond the traditional differentiation between individual and society recumbent specification of the relation between literary communication and to her involved reader's psyches before the background of the development of the modern English novel. Besides, Luhmann concept of the achievement which describes the relation of the social systems together is expanded by Reinfandt on the relation of literature system and the consciousness systems participating in him. Both system types stand according to Reinfandt in a mutual "constitutional connection" and from the literature system of the reader's psyches produced achievement is seen above all in the "interpretation".
Epochs more fashionably of literary communication
Title view of epochs of modern literature
What concerns the creation manners of the literary works, fundamental possibilities of the Relationierung of literary elements exist according to ungainly to system-theoretical model four to new works, i.e. roughly said, literary works can be produced basically in four different manners. These are identified as a romanticism, realism, aestheticism as well as avant-garde. Besides, The well-known epoch concepts of the literature find out a system-theoretically sound new definition of which a gainful specification is expected as an orthodox Epochenbezeichnugen felt a little selective, as she delivers the traditional continuance of the German studies. In this connection it is also substituted from the mind history and the image coming from her influenced hermeneutics of a relatively rational and linear tramping history of literature by already in 1927 by the Russian formalist Juri Tynjanow in the literature-theoretical discourse introduced concept of the literary evolution. Besides, goes out ungainly from the following differentiation-leading criteria according to which literary works can be classed:
Under romanticism all poetic staggering attempts are grasped which differentiated particularly the autonomy of the literature system compared with all other functional systems of the originating ones functionally, in different subranges accent being made up society: System environment border itself becomes here with it the medium for literary form profit.
Realistic literature against it already goes out from the existence of literary autonomy, imports external-literary theories of social reality (e.g., the Freudian psychoanalysis or the historical materialism of Karl Marx) in the already established literature system and forms her works accordingly as psychodramas, etc., Besides, it cannot be a society fiction job of the literature to illustrate her Umwelten congruentially; the observed environment is "transfigured", instead, up to a certain degree and in this way is made literature-shaped.
Ästhetizistische literature concentrates again particularly upon system-internal potentials, uses primarily the notification medium of the language for literary form profits and, besides, places completely on linguistic beauty, stylistic cunning and an in general high degree in Poetizität which is relatively independent of the literary genre.
Finally, the avant-garde pursues a decisive Entdifferenzierungsanliegen and positions itself against the Aufsplittung of the modern society in functional subsystems. She wants to make soft in particular the system border already hardened at the beginning of the 20th century between literature system and politics system to be able to make politics with literature. Besides, it was always about a radical circulation of the ruling social relations what led partially also of to be passed or lasting affirmation of totalitarian trends.
With these four staggering manners all fundamental possibilities of the production of literary works are outbidded about since the early 1930s years in accordance with the system theory. Hence, contemporary authors are made spend her literary achievements as innovations which they are in reality not, but merely new editions and Rekombinationen of well-known: Neo-realism, neo-avant-garde etc. this phase which continues till the present calls ungainly in the conceptual connection with the German Romanisten Hans Robert Jauss, hence, also the relatively vague epoch of the "Postismus".
The Leidener model of the text understanding which was also developed in the beginning of the 1990s in the Leidener institute of system theory and Humanoria (LISH) in the Netherlands under leadership of the Germanists Matthias Prangel and Hanging de mountain is to be seen as an other important variation of system-theoretical literature. Indeed, it does not concern a recent attempt to determine function and leading difference of the literature system of the modern society. It is based rather on a Reinterpretation of the communication theory Luhmann before the background of traditional herm new tablemakers and more semantically or semasiologischer, so the meaning production of concerning considerations who should be connected with Luhmann communication draught to raise the literature-scientific applicability of the sociological system theory.
Besides, in the centre of the considerations stands the reproach directed in Luhmann address, the concept of the Ereignishaftigkeit which implies a quick loss of the actuality of an already effected communication to have booked above all for orally gone to court communication. Prangel and de mountain which teaches since 1996 at the university of Sheffield and has turned during the last years stronger to the mind history assume by contrast from the fact that also in the medium of the writing the carried out communication which shows the normal case in the literature system is marked by Ereignishaftigkeit and loses, hence, equally rapidly to actuality. Besides, a double demarcation is carried out compared with the ahistorical Strukturalismus as well as the Dekonstruktion: According to the Leidener reconstruction Luhmann communication model goes out neither from a synchronous reference net which assigns a firm meaning independent of context to the signs from her fixed differenziellen distances to the other signs, nor from an infinite play of the differences which leads to a permanent movement of meanings and with it too over and over again to new versions because there are within this synchronous reference net no benchmarks with permanently stable semantics which would favour a certain version for longer periods away.
Luhmann has proved, instead that every communication does not become established informed, so in „difference to a context of other possibilities“ always in difference to at the same moment which forms as it were the negative foil of the really updated communication within the scope of a historically unique constellation as "a withdrawal context" and forbids a work-immanent analysis of literary texts or works. Indeed, Luhmann has not transferred this examination strictly enough on the level in the medium of the writing taking place production of text meanings, which is why to consider a system-theoretical literature in the analysis of texts their "context difference restraint" appropriately, speak has to reconstruct what brings the draught in big nearness to the theories of the Intertextualität. For this reason the Leidener model is also traded as a text / context difference model.