Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Modern Philology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 138.253.100.121 on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:32:03 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
458 Modern Philology(May 1981)
MatthewLittle/Mississippi
State University
This content downloaded from 138.253.100.121 on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:32:03 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Book Reviews 459
major modernwriters" (p. 31). As Gunn shows, such criticsas Scott have dealt
with the very subjects-death, loss of faith,or man's inhumanityto man-that
have traditionally been the objects of bothliteraryand religiousdiscourse. A good
historicist,Gunn illustrateshis remarkswithreferenceto a wide varietyof Amer-
ican writers.He suggestsas well thatin recentliterarytheorytherehas been a
good deal of crossing of boundaries between religiousstudies and other critical
disciplines,withthe resultthatGadamer contributesto literarytheorywhileLevi-
Strauss writes almost as a theologian,Ricoeur as a structuralanthropologist,
Mircea Eliade as a literarycritic,and NorthropFrye as a historianof religion.
Only at this point do Gunn's almost Prometheanaims in this book become
fullyapparent.These aims are two. First,he intendsto fuse religiousstudieswith
literarycriticismthroughthe mediationsof methodsthat have influencedboth:
linguistics,cultural anthropology,comparative philology,folklore,philosophy,
sociology, psychoanalysis,ethnology,archeology,hermeneutics,and semiotics.
Second, throughhis centralfocus and the methodsthatmediatethem,he intends
to exploretheveryissues thatnow seem centralto criticism:"the relationbetween
authorand work, the natureof texts and textuality,the affectivedistinctiveness
of particulargenres, the question of literaryimpact, the relationbetween the
spoken and the written[and] the grammarof individualmodes of discourse" (p.
45).
I have paused over this firstchapter because it well representsthe whole
book. Each succeeding chapter tends to move in the same way. Gunn usually
beginsby proposinga few hypotheses;thenhe explores the applicabilityto them
of a wide varietyof critical tools; and finallyhe fuses these investigationsin
readingespecially seminaltexts by major Americanwriters.In this he himselfis
very much in the American tradition;for he is adventurous and restless, he
transplantsold tools fromforeignculturesto solve new problemsat home, and
he bringsback fromhis encounterswith "Otherness" an account of how his
subject may be redefinedand freshlyunderstood.
In the second chapter, "Forms of Religious Meaning in Literature,"Gunn
borrows M. H. Abrams's criticaltypologyfromThe Mirrorand the Lamp and
distinguishesfourelementsbasic to any work of art (the artist,the work itself,
the world, and the audience), and four predominatingkinds of critical theory
which give special emphasis to one or anotherof these elements. Characteristi-
cally, he explores main currentsin criticism,then provides a historicistlook at
the developmentof criticalproblems,rejects all narrowdoctrinalumbrellas,and
at last calls forcomprehensivevariety:"In developinga viable criticalconception
of the relationshipbetween these two modes of awareness and expression [i.e.,
religionand literature],our best hope, it seems to me, lies in the directionof
principledeclecticism" (p. 76). In general he argues persuasively-and always
gracefullybut vigorously-that literature,like religion,is "neither totally im-
mersed in the world of everydayexperience nor completelydivorced fromit."
Ontologically,he says, "it belongs to the realm of hypothesis:and not of actual
fact" (p. 83).
The thrust,which remainsconstantin the book's remainingthreeessays, is
clear. Basically,Gunnis so able to see theconnectionsbetweenvariousdisciplines
This content downloaded from 138.253.100.121 on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:32:03 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
460 Modern Philology(May 1981)
of SouthernCalifornia
Jay Martin/University
This content downloaded from 138.253.100.121 on Mon, 04 Jan 2016 17:32:03 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions