Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-18T07:04:32.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Place and Function of a Standard in a Genetic Theory of Literary Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Extract

In Modern Philology for April and July, 1909, I attempted to construct a theory of literary development on the basis of genetic psychology. Literature was there defined to be a function of consciousness, a psychological and social product devised for the purpose of revealing the ethical and æsthetic values of human life. So far as the propagation and variation of literary forms are concerned emphasis was laid upon the fact that these processes take place in every case through the medium of a conscious personality. This human consciousness is endowed with certain powers or aptitudes by virtue of which it assimilates to itself the traditions, conventions, artistic forms, religious beliefs, ethical convictions, scientific ideas, etc., of the society in which it is born, and hands them down to the generation that follows. The physical and mental endowment which enables the individual thus to learn and to transmit his acquirements to others constitutes his physical or biological heredity. The process of learning imitatively from the models, patterns, or examples, of one's predecessors is called by the psychologists “imitative selection”; and the great body of traditions, conventions, forms, from which the individual must learn, and to which he must adjust himself, is termed his “social heredity.” Variation in literature may therefore be defined as the attempt more or less constant to adjust literature to the writer's social heredity—or, as Prof. Manly has shown in the case of the mediæval drama, it is the combination of elements or unit characters hitherto kept separate. The cardinal factor to be emphasized in any study of variation in literature is therefore the individual consciousness, its power of imitative selection, its dependence on social heredity for the materials with which it works, and its power of constructive imagination by which new combinations are produced. For example, I showed that Hauptman's naturalistic drama is to be explained as the combination of the traditional dramatic form with the evolutionary idea that man's destiny is controlled by heredity and environment and not by free will. Both these elements, the traditional dramatic form and the evolutionary idea, Hauptmann assimilated from his social heredity, and then by his power of æsthetic invention he united them in a new variation, the naturalistic drama.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1910

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 379 note 1 Biological Analogy in Literary Criticism: I. Variation and Personality. II. The Struggle for Existence and the Survival of the Fittest; Modern Philology, April and July, 1909.

page 380 note 1 Literary Forms and the New Theory of the Origin of Species. Modern Philology, April, 1907.

page 395 note 1 Kuno Francke, History of German Literature as Determined by Social Forces, New York, 1905: “It seems to me that all literary development is determined by the incessant conflict of two elemental human tendencies, the tendency toward personal freedom and the tendency toward collective organization” (p. vi). “The fundamental conception which underlies the following account of the development of German literature is that of a continual struggle between individualistic and collectivistic tendencies, between man and society, between personality and tradition, between liberty and unity, between cosmopolitanism and nationalism, a struggle which may be said to be the prime motive power of all human progress” (p. 3).