Abstract
In his books The Literary Work of Art and The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art,1 Ingarden deals with an aesthetic phenomenon for which he coined the well formulated name “Unbestimmtheitsstellen”, or “Points of Indeterminateness.”2 Due to the special structure and the connotative character of the language of a literary work of art, this phenomenon constitutes one of the most essential elements of such a work and is of greatest significance for Literary Criticism. Although Ingarden points out the importance of Points of Indeterminateness to some extent, his pioneering and all-embracing work on the theory of the arts and especially of literature forces him to limit the discussion of it to the “stratum of presented objects”, the third of the four strata or layers which, according to his theory, establish the work in its entirety; hence, he has devoted not more than ten pages in his first and seven pages in his second book to this problem.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Roman Ingarden: Das literarische Kunstwerk, Tübingen 1965, pp. 261–270.
Roman Ingarden: Vom Erkennen des literarischen Kunstwerks. Tübingen 1968, pp. 49–55.
I follow in most cases the English translations of Ingarden’s special terms and concepts Eugene Falk’s brilliant book The Poetics of Roman Ingarden, Chapel Hill 1981.
Translation of Ruth Ann Crowley and Kenneth R. Olson: The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art. Evanston, Illinois 1973, pp. 46–47.
Das literarische Kunstwerk, op. cit., pp. 267–68.
Cf. the pioneering attempt of Jacob Steiner: Die Bühnenanweisung, Göttingen 1969.
Das literarische Kunstwerk, op. cit., p. 268.
Cf. Wolfgang Iser: Der Akt des Lesens, München 1976, pp. 267–280.
Das literarische Kunstwerk, op cit., p. 270.
Sem Dresden: Thomas Mann and Marcel Proust: On Myth and Antimyth. In: Joseph Strelka (ed.): Literary Criticism and Myth, University Park and London 1980, p. 33.
Offprint from “Egyetemes Philologiai Közlöny”, Budapest 1933, p. 156 and seq.
Thomas Mann — Karl Kerényi: Gespräche in Briefen. Zürich 1960, pp. 42–43.
The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, op. cit., p. 50.
Cf. Ernst Robert Curtius: Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter, Bern 1948, pp. 166–69.
C. Hugh Holman: A Handbook to Literature, Indianapolis 1972, p. 540.
Das literarische Kunstwerk, op. cit., p. 270.
Das literarische Kunstwerk, op. cit., p. 266.
The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, op. cit., p. 50.
The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, op. cit., p. 52.
The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, op. cit., p. 57.
James K. Lyon: “Ganz und gar nicht hermetisch”: Überlegungen zum “richtigen” Lesen von Paul Celans Lyrik. In: Joseph Strelka (ed.): Psalm und Hawdallah. Zum Werk Paul Celans. Bern — Frankfurt — New York 1986.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1990 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Strelka, J.P. (1990). Roman Ingarden’s “Points of Indeterminateness”: A Consideration of Their Practical Application to Literary Criticism. In: Rudnick, H.H. (eds) Ingardeniana II. Analecta Husserliana, vol 30. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1964-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1964-8_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7378-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-1964-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive