From the capacity of literature to lead to the discovery of the meaning of reality in the formulation of language, we derive formative qualities for the individual -aesthetic, cognitive, affective, linguistic, etc. – that are leading to a new justification of literary teaching: for its provision of models of language and discourse, for its generation of a system of shared references that constitutes a cultural community through the collective imaginary and for its quality as an instrument of insertion of the individual in culture, «a culture that, in a broad sense, includes everything that has existence itself, both individuals and the reality in which they live immersed» (Balaguer, 1996:15).
It is from this formative value that it can be affirmed that the objective of literary education is, in the first place, to contribute to the formation of the person, a formation indissolubly linked to the construction of sociability and carried out through the confrontation with texts that make explicit the way in which previous and contemporary generations have approached and approach the evaluation of human activity through language. An evaluation that can be based, as Bronckart does, on Habermas’ theories on human activity according to which linguistic evaluation leads to representations of the objective world, the social world, and the subjective world.
Secondly, the confrontation between the diversity of literary texts offers students the opportunity to confront social and cultural diversity, while at the same time initiating them to the major philosophical questions addressed over time. Thus, for example, the very enunciative structure of the texts reveals the passage from a monolithic enunciator, reflecting a Cartesian ideal subject, to a multiple enunciator, testimony to the taking into consideration of the social subject by nineteenth-century thought, as described by Bakhtin, and even to the contemporary reflection on the individual, of the contemporary reflection on the individual from the parameters of a postmodernity that has accentuated the relativistic vision of the world from a decentered observation of the individual, so that the individual is not seen as a product of individual consciousness, but as a process, perpetually under construction, perpetually contradictory and open to change.
I invite everyone to read Matias’ post with the theme of the day
Finally, I encourage everyone to reflect on the concept of the day. No one else but us can re-signify our own being