Kombinace, nebo doplnění? O dvou typech procesu v literární teorii Romana Ingardena a Wolfganga Isera
Combination or Completion? On two types of Process in Literary Theories of Roman Ingarden and Wolfgang Iser

Summary/Abstract: There can be no doubt that Wolfgang Iser’s literary theory was strongly influenced by Roman Ingarden’s writings on literature. Iser often quotes from Ingarden and develops some of his key ideas. Themain aim of this article is to show that even in the cases where Iser develops Ingarden’s ideas andconcepts he significantly changes their meaning and function. This tendency is not arbitrary butrather mirrors the difference of aims between the two theories. In this article, the author tries toshow how Ingarden’s theory revolves around his consideration of the differences between the realand purely intentional object. Here, the literary work serves as an example of the purely intentionalobject. By contrast, Iser’s work revolves around his opposition to any theory which emphasizes theessential meaning of a work of literature without considering the reading process itself. This attention to the reading process is the main aim of Iser’s theory. The article develops the thesis that the twoopposing definitions of the literary work arise from this essential difference, which in turn explainsthe dissimilarity, in terms of both meaning and function, between such seemingly similar conceptsas Ingarden’s ‘places of indeterminacy’ (die Unbestimmtheitstellen) and Iser’s ‘blanks’ (die Leerstellen).

• Details
• Contents