The Devil Is in the Examples. On Literary Theory and Comparative Literature in the Programs of the First Two Years of the Liceo

  • Toni Veneri University of Trieste - Istituto Gramsci del Friuli Venezia Giulia
Keywords: School, Rhetoric, Structuralism,

Abstract

The teaching of the Italian language and literature during the first two years of the liceo occupies a crucial position in the educational process. Despite this, it draws much less attention than the preceding and following phases. While the ministry provides only generic indications, we still lack a significant debate on its contents, such as the one that revolves around the last three years' program and its textbooks, where many diverse and competing editorial proposals are provided by scholars and publishers. Thus, heterogenous forms of 'colonization' led the way to the cohabitation of various  discourses and rhetorics, often conflicting, either for their premises or their outcomes. On the one hand, the Western literary canon is reduced to raw material for textual analysis, in order to verify and confirm laws and procedures, which seem to regulate rather than describe the ways in which literature might function. On the other hand, the program insists on a few texts, considered as foundational to European and national culture, inflating their presentation with the highest ethical and aesthetic values. First and foremost, this paper aims to draw attention to the failing complementarity of these approaches and to the problematic implications of this failure. A second focus will engage the disciplinary dimension of these issues: if we talk academics, it must be said that very little of what is taught about literature in these years falls within the range of Italian studies. The recurring use of foreign texts, even if given in translation, allows us to understand their reading and analysis in class as a comparative practice. Moreover, the instruments and categories of literary analysis also have various origins, and combine elements deriving from traditional humanistic taxonomies (e.g., included within rhetoric, metrics, stylistics) with the results - the easiest to outline - of a historically circumscribed theoretical reflection (structuralism). Scholars have long pointed at the limits, weak points and implications of those results. Nevertheless, except for a few rare cases, no revision has yet been undertaken to alter their presence within the textbooks. Such revision could indeed proceed from a re-evaluation of the categories traditionally associated with rhetoric, to be understood as crucial moments in the process of interpretation, rather than pure technical facts.

Author Biography

Toni Veneri, University of Trieste - Istituto Gramsci del Friuli Venezia Giulia

Toni Veneri lives in Trieste, where, after his archivist qualification (2009), he obtained his PhD in Italian Literature (2011) and was appointed “cultore della materia” in Comparative Literature and Literary Theory. He has since been working as high school instructor (Literature, History, Latin), while also functioning as Director of the Istituto Gramsci del Friuli Venezia Giulia. He is currently completing a period of postdoctoral research at the University of Haifa. Among his areas of interest are: the literary and scientific construction of space in the Medieval and Early Modern periods; travel literature in its encounters with the history of cartography, art, print and diplomacy; and theoretical issues in the relationship of history to literature.

 

References

Bibliografia

Bandini, Emanuela, “Non come un romanzo: retoriche scolastiche ed educazione alla lettura”, Between IV.7 (2014), http://www.Between-journal.it

Bertoni, Tilli, “«Se questa è vita?»: scuola e università”, Between III.6 (2013), http://www.Between-journal.it

Cantarella, Eva – Galli, Beatrice – Quinzio Maria, Letizia, Meravigliosamente. Mito. Epica. Altri Linguaggi, Torino, Einaudi scuola, 2011.

Cilento, Antonella, Asino chi legge. I giovani, i libri, la scrittura, Parma, Guanda, 2010.

Ciocca, Daniela – Ferri, Tina, Il nuovo Narrami o Musa, Milano, Arnoldo Mondadori scuola, 2011.

de Man, Paul, "Semiology and Rhetoric", Diacritics 3 (1973) 3: 27-33.

Genette, Gérard, Palimpsestes. La littérature au second dégré, Paris, Seuil, trad. it. Palinsesti, Torino, Einaudi, 1997.

Iacoli, Giulio, “Sinergie immaginate: note sull’insegnamento della letteratura fra scuola e università”, Una musa che non incanta? Le letteratura a scuola nell’era multimediale. Atti del convegno Abbazia di Casamari – Veroli (Fr) 8 marzo 2012, Ed. Luca Dell’Omo, Firenze, Franco Cesati editore, 2013: 85-96.

Lausberg, Heinrich, Elementen der literarische Rhetorik, München, Max Hueber Verlag, 1949, trad. it. Elementi di retorica, Bologna, il Mulino, 2002.

Michelstaedter, Carlo, La persuasione e la rettorica, Milano, Adelphi, 1999.

Petronio, Giuseppe, “Perché la letteratura?”, Problemi 91 (1991): 100-114.

Petronio, Giuseppe, “La storia come racconto”, Problemi 106 (1996): 243-250.

Petronio, Giuseppe, Viaggio nel paese di poesia, Milano, Arnoldo Mondadori, 1999.

Propp, Vladimir, Morfologiija skazki, Leningrado, 1928, trad. it. Morfologia della fiaba, Torino, Einaudi, 1966.

Raimondi, Ezio, La retorica d’oggi, Bologna, il Mulino, 2002.

Schaeffer, J.-M., Qu’est-ce qu’un genre littéraire, Paris, Seuil, 1989, trad. it. Che cos’è un genere letterario, Parma, Pratiche, 1992.

Todorov Tzvetan, Introduction à la littérature fantastique, Paris, Seuil, 1970, trad. it. La letteratura fantastica, Milano, Garzanti, 1977.

Todorov, Tzvetan, La Littérature en péril, Paris, Flammarion, 2007, trad. it. La letteratura in pericolo, Milano, Garzanti, 2008.

Published
2014-05-30
How to Cite
Veneri, T. (2014). The Devil Is in the Examples. On Literary Theory and Comparative Literature in the Programs of the First Two Years of the <i>Liceo</i&gt;. Between, 4(7). https://doi.org/10.13125/2039-6597/1162
Section
Ore Rotundo. Ethics of Public Intervention