A Research On Iser’s Literature Anthropology

Wolfgang Iser, a representative figure of reception aesthetics, is known for his theory of aesthetic response during literature reading activity in 1960s. In the late 70s, Iser turned attention of research to the whole process of text production and author’s function in a text, from reader’s response during literature reading. His theory aim expanded from the microcosmic level of how a reader acquires textual meaning in reading activities to the exploration of the meaning of reading. After doing researches on every element of literature text, Iser put forward that the fictive is the most outstanding characteristic for literary works. Different from other fictions, fictions in literature exposes its own unreality in order to revealing the necessity of literature. In literary works, fiction activates imagination, and the imagination make it possible for literature to step out of realistic existence forms, and free from the constraint of mundane and morality. The interaction between fiction and imagination not only realize the coexistence of objective world and subjective world, the unification of external world and internal world but also transcends this kind of unification and step into an unfettered freedom realm. Iser believes that it is human disposition to pursue freedom and transcending. He thinks that the fictive and the imaginary are always linked to literature development and human being’s self-development. therefore literature gains timeless value in the course of history.Based on Iser’s research on literary anthropology and the existing research results, this paper aims at discussing the proposal of Iser’s literary anthropology, the basic connotation of literary anthropology, and critical voice against it, digging out the reasons why Iser shifted his theoretical research focus as well as the contemporary value of such theoretical research focus shift. This paper consists of five parts. The introduction part gives a brief introduction to research background, source of selected topic, and aim and objectives of the research, and straighten out the research status of Iser’s literary anthropology.The main body is divided into four parts. Chapter one introduces the establishment of Iser’s literary anthropology. This chapter proceeds with a discussion mainly from two dimension:Iser’s shift of his theoretical perspective, and the comparison between Iser’s literary anthropology and other related researches, so as to excavate the continuity and uniqueness of Iser’s literary anthropology theory. Chapter two comprehensively elucidates the basic connotation of Iser’s literary anthropology from three views:fiction, imagination and the ontological status of fiction and imagination. Chapter three discusses Iser’s critical practice under the influence of literary anthropology, mainly divided into two parts:analysis of pastoral poem and the image Part one reveals the way in which fiction play in literature text. Part two explores the anthropological significance of literary fiction from two aspects:the doubling process and the overall makeup. By analyzing from three aspects:dilemma of the reading theory, the crisis of literature and the discovery of "others" in anthropology, and theoretical perspective from microcosmic to macrocosmic, chapter four mainly explores Iser’s shift of his theoretical research focus. The author believes that Iser’s theoretical research focus shift has deepened and completed the original theory, and responded positively to the boom in theoretical research. Then further discuss the thoughts and reflection bring by Iser’s theoretical research focus shift. The author believes that although Iser’s literary anthropology has its limitation, it should be encouraged He asked the meaning of the ontology of literature while the crisis of literature and the "cultural turn".At the end of this paper, the author gives a conclusion:we find that Iser’s shift of his theoretical research focus from reception aesthetics to literary anthropology, from the microcosmic level of aesthetic response to the macroscopic level of literary and its meaning, is because he has constantly deepen and systematize d his theoretical research, and which also conforms to the internal logic course of from microcosmic to macroscopic. He tries to answer these questions what literature is and what it can become, and hopes to haul the theoretical research focus back to literature itself, which can be used as a reference for the literary theory construction in the new era.