Mon Jan 20 10:12:29 1997

From owner-tc-list  Mon Jan 20 10:12:29 1997
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id KAA04123; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:11:33 -0500
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:07:22 -0500 (EST)
From: ANDREW SMITH 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: The Original Text
In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1580


On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Robert B. Waltz wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, "Mirkovic, Alexander" 
> wrote:
> 
> >	Following on the previous discussion, I believe 
> >that it is not wise to make a very sharp distinction 
> >between literary and textual criticism.
> 
> This statement I simply cannot accept. There is an unequivocal
> and undeniable distinction between the two. 
> Textual criticism is one of the few Biblical disciplines based
> upon FACTS -- the facts being the readings of the manuscripts.
> We may disagree about the significance and interpretation of
> these facts, but the facts themselves do not change.
> Literary criticism, on the other hand, is purely interpretation.
> There is no objective way to tell it from idle speculation.

Another way to express the difference between TC and LC is that TC is
ultimately about physical reality - ink on paper, an archeological fact.
LC is about mental realities - ideas and thoughts. This is true even when
TC and LC are being used and applied in non-religous arenas: Shakespearean
and Aristotelian texts, for example.

> >	Some post-modern theory (deconstruction) might be 
> >useful here. There is no original text!
> 
> Surely you do not mean this. There was an original text (possibly,
> in a few cases, multiple original texts. But always a finite set).
> That original text *has not survived* in any known manuscript.
> But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I have serious reservations about how it would ever be possible to find
Derida, his thoughts, or his works "useful."

Back