 |
Perspectives on Three Decades of Cognitivist EffortsPanel Discussion at the IGEL conference 2004 with: |
 |
Gerald Cupchik, Andrew Elfenbein, Art Graesser, Uri Margolin, Alan Richardson, and Meir SternbergChair: Will van Peer |
||
Introduction: Els Andringa
That the so-called cognitive turn has on the whole turned out such a disappointment regarding the [narrative] genre most attractive to it and most amenable to comparative assessment, however, yet leaves the future open. The unhealthy balance sheet to date only brings home the general lesson of isolationism and argues for a sea change in this particular new arrival, from self-conception downward, without either belittling the spirit of its enterprise or overidealizing the established poetic tradition with which it might, and still may, form an interdiscipline other and better, if not larger or greater, than the sum of its parts. (Sternberg 2003a: 298)
In 2003, Meir Sternberg published two long articles under the title "Universals of Narrative and Their Cognitivist Fortunes" in the journal Poetics Today, of which he is the main editor.[references] Starting from the question how "narrative" in a broad sense has been approached in different disciplines, the articles discuss in a highly critical way the premises, concepts and results used in research on narrative understanding in cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics, artificial intelligence, discourse psychology, and the empirical study of literature. A range of studies and theoretical outlines covering the period from the early seventies to the current time passes the eye, disclosing how, from the perspective of the author, the 'cognitivist' efforts have remained separated from the longstanding tradition of narratological and comparative studies, and missed or disregarded essential insights in these fields. Piece by piece, the articles inquire "what has gone wrong in discipline crossing" (p. 325) and with this in view scrutinize concepts and models such as, for example, schemata, inferences, story grammars, gaps/blanks, closure, the connection between cognition and emotion, and questions of 'point' and 'tellability'. However, not only publications from the cognitive sciences pass in review, but also studies from literary theory that have attempted to formulate uni-dimensional, formulaic models of narrative composition which fail to capture the dynamics of the narrative processes. They are confronted with the concept of the narrative universals of suspense, curiosity, and surprise, of which "each encodes a distinct functional operation of the mind within narrative's overall intersequencing: the dynamics of prospection, of retrospection, and of recognition, respectively" (p. 327; see further p. 326-328; 517-519), and with the idea of the 'protean', continuously mobile mind (p. 519 et seq.). Implied is a criticism of theory formation and methodology that is depicted as doomed to rigidity and reductionism, thereby missing the richness and mobility of narrative comprehension and experience.
For the Empirical Study of Literature, one of the main aims has been the interdisciplinary approach, the crossfertilization of traditional subdomains of literary studies, such as narratology and reception aesthetics and the fields of the social sciences. The accusation of failure and the severe criticism of attempts made so far together with an opening for the future were the reason for IGEL to arrange a panel discussion with the author of the articles. Five discussants from the fields of the cognitive science, narratology and comparative literature took up the challenge and wrote brief position papers in reaction to Sternberg's articles. Under the inspiring chairmanship of Will van Peer the papers were presented to the audience and critically discussed with the author. The position papers and the gist of Sternberg's counterarguments are available below.
Gerald Cupchik | Andrew Elfenbein | Art Graesser | Uri Margolin | Alan Richardson | Meir Sternberg
Note. Andrew Elfenbein's contribution available here is a short overview and response.
References
Sternberg, Meir. 2003a. Universals of Narrative and Their Cognitivist Fortunes (I). Poetics Today 24, 2, 297-395.
---------- 2003b. Universals of Narrative and Their Cognitivist Fortunes
(II). Poetics Today 24, 3, 517-638.