Peter Lamarque is hoogleraar filosofie aan de University of York. Hij kwam in 2000 bij de afdeling filosofie. Daarvoor was hij Ferens Professor of Philosophy aan de University of Hull en hoofd van de afdeling filosofie tussen 1995 en 2000. Hij was docent en vervolgens hoofddocent aan de University of Stirling tussen 1972 en 1995. Van 1995 tot 2008 was hij redacteur van de British Journal of Aesthetics.
By exploring central issues in the philosophy of literature, illustrated by a wide range of novels, poems, and plays, Philosophy of Literature gets to the heart of why literature matters to us and sheds new light on the nature and interpretation of literary works.
Focusing on the metaphysical dimensions of art, the book delves into the nature of cultural artifacts and their unique properties. It examines how these properties relate to interpretation and style, leading to unexpected insights about the identity of artworks. The author contrasts the perceived essence of a work with its true nature, offering a thought-provoking analysis that challenges conventional understandings of art.
Focusing on the essence of narrative, Peter Lamarque delves into the distinctions between fictional and non-fictional storytelling. He examines what makes great literary narratives unique and seeks to clarify complex debates surrounding narrative within philosophy, critical theory, and narratology. This exploration promises to enhance understanding of narrative's role in literature and its broader implications.
Oscar Wilde's famous quip "All art is quite useless" might not be as outrageous or demonstrably false as is often supposed. No-one denies that much art begins life with practical aims in mind: religious, moral, political, propagandistic, or the aggrandising of its subjects. But those works that survive the test of time will move into contexts where for new audiences any initial instrumental values recede and the works come to be valued for their own sake. The book explores this idea and its ramifications. 0Must aesthetics in its pursuit of art and beauty inevitably be culture-bound? Or can it transcend cultural differences and speak meaningfully of universal values: timelessly human not merely historically relative? The case of literature or film puts further pressure on the idea of art valued for its own sake. Characters in works of literature and film or finely-honed emotions in poetry often give pleasure precisely because they resonate with our own lives and seem (in the great works) to say something profound about human existence. Is not this kind of insight why we value such works? Yet the conclusion is not quite as clear-cut as it might seem and the idea of valuing something for its own sake never quite goes away.