“Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson

“Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson first appeared in Handbook of Narratology (2016) and examines the complex interplay between factual narratives and literary value. In this chapter, Pettersson explores why factual accounts are traditionally seen as lacking literary merit, yet posits that historical and contextual shifts in literary theory have nuanced this perception. He proposes a dual perspective: one that recognizes a stable literary aesthetic, traditionally favoring fictional, imaginative texts, and another that considers how cultural contexts affect which narratives are valued as literature. Pettersson argues that factual discourse, often defined by its reliance on verifiable truth and assertion, is distinct from literature, which invites imaginative engagement and subjective experience. However, he suggests that some factual works, such as Churchill’s speeches and Alexievich’s documentary narratives, may transcend their informational basis and attain a form of literariness by inviting emotional and reflective experiences. This work is significant in literary theory as it expands the boundaries of literariness, highlighting the fluidity of literary categories and the subjective nature of what is deemed “literary” over time.

Summary of “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson

• Objective and Scope: Pettersson’s chapter discusses why factual narratives are often viewed as non-literary, while also examining how historical and cultural contexts can alter perceptions of literariness. He notes that a “fixed literary perspective” traditionally downplays the value of factual narratives in literature but suggests that “historical and contextual variability” (p. 602) impacts how we understand literature across time.
• Complexity of Factuality and Literariness: Pettersson identifies both factuality and literariness as complex concepts, noting that factual discourse involves assertions vouched for by the speaker or writer, which are aimed at conveying truth (p. 602). In contrast, literature often includes elements of imagination and subjective engagement, highlighting an inherent difference between these types of discourse.
• Literature as a Social Construct: He asserts that literature lacks a definitive, universally accepted essence; rather, “the concept of literature is a category introduced by individuals and societies” (p. 603) and varies widely in its application over time and across societies. Thus, what qualifies as literature has no “true manner” of classification dictated by cultural reality alone.
• Historical Shifts in the Concept of Literature: The idea of what constitutes literature has evolved, especially during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when “poetry, fictional prose, and drama” came to be viewed as central forms of literary art (p. 604). However, in earlier periods, genres such as oratory, history, and philosophy were also considered part of literature, reflecting a “wider conception of literature” (p. 605).
• Literariness Beyond Fictionality and Style: Pettersson downplays fictionality and stylistic craftsmanship as primary attributes of literariness, emphasizing instead the notion of “experience-inviting” discourse. He describes this as a use of language that allows readers to “reflect on, ponder over, and explore” representations, thus engaging with texts on a deeper, more personal level (p. 607).
• Factual Narratives with Literary Value: Despite the usual separation of factual discourse from literary value, Pettersson explains that factual texts can acquire literariness when they also invite significant experiences. Using Winston Churchill’s speech “Give Us the Tools” and Svetlana Alexievich’s The Unwomanly Face of War, he illustrates how factual narratives can resonate emotionally, inviting readers to “form a kind of cognitive and emotional perspective on wider issues” (p. 610).
• Cultural and Institutional Influences on Literariness: Pettersson notes that the perception of literariness often depends on institutional and cultural contexts, such as libraries, literary awards, and literary studies, which apply varying degrees of inclusiveness (p. 606). This flexibility can result in works of factual discourse being awarded literary recognition, even as libraries might classify the same works differently.
• Conclusion: Pettersson concludes by emphasizing the variability of the concept of literature, especially in Western culture. He suggests that “experience-inviting discourse” encapsulates a key quality of what contemporary society considers literary, but acknowledges that literariness remains a question of definition, context, and evolving cultural standards (p. 611).

Literary Terms/Concepts in “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson

Literary Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Reference/Explanation in Pettersson’s Work
Factuality	The quality of a narrative that asserts or presents information as verifiable truth.	Pettersson defines factual discourse as “dominated by assertion,” where the writer or speaker vouches for the truth of the statements (p. 602).
Literariness	The quality or characteristic that makes a text literary, often through imaginative or stylistic features.	Pettersson notes the challenge of defining literariness, suggesting it varies historically and culturally, shaped by societal standards (p. 602).
Experience-Inviting Discourse	Language use that encourages readers to engage in emotional and reflective experiences beyond the factual content.	He describes this as discourse that allows readers to “reflect on, ponder over, and explore” representations, fostering personal engagement (p. 607).
Social Construction of Literature	The idea that literature is not a fixed category but is shaped by cultural and historical contexts.	Literature is “a category introduced by individuals and societies for sorting texts” and lacks a “true manner” of distinguishing between literary and non-literary (p. 603).
Historical Variability of Literature	The concept that the boundaries of what is considered literature have shifted over time.	Pettersson discusses how genres like oratory, history, and philosophy were once central to literature but gradually narrowed to imaginative forms (p. 604).
Fictionality	The quality of being fictional or imaginary, often associated with literature but not essential to it.	Pettersson downplays fictionality as a defining characteristic of literature, arguing that non-fictional texts can also possess literary value if experience-inviting (p. 607).
Institutional Context	The role of cultural institutions, like libraries and literary awards, in defining and categorizing literature.	He explains that institutions apply varying standards, with literary awards sometimes recognizing factual works as literary based on inclusive criteria (p. 606).
Classical and Modern Literature	The contrast between early broad definitions of literature and modern narrowed conceptions focusing on imagination.	Originally, literature encompassed poetry, oratory, history, and philosophy; modern views align more with fiction, poetry, and drama (p. 604-605).
Assertion	The act of presenting statements as truth, a key feature of factual discourse.	Factual discourse is “dominated by assertion” where the author vouches for truth, as opposed to inviting imaginative interpretation (p. 602).
Core Idea of Literary Value	The central quality that defines literature as valuable, often subjective and influenced by cultural expectations.	Pettersson argues that literary value may center around the potential to invite meaningful, reflective experiences rather than strictly fictional or aesthetic elements (p. 607).

Contribution of “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson to Literary Theory/Theories

Literary Theory	Contribution	References in Pettersson’s Work
Formalism	Challenges formalism by suggesting that literariness is not solely dependent on formal or stylistic elements but also on context and reader engagement with experience-inviting discourse.	Pettersson downplays the idea of “a ‘literary’ style or form as a really crucial element” of literature (p. 607).
Structuralism	Contrasts structuralist rigidity in defining literature by proposing that definitions of literariness vary by historical and social contexts, rejecting a universal literary structure.	He argues against a fixed definition of literature, emphasizing that it’s “socially and historically constructed” (p. 603).
Reception Theory	Aligns with Reception Theory by focusing on the reader’s engagement and the cognitive-emotional impact, or experience-inviting nature, of the text.	Pettersson describes experience-inviting discourse as inviting readers “to reflect on, ponder over” the representations (p. 607).
Historicism	Reinforces Historicism by examining how the concept of literariness has evolved over time, influenced by the cultural and social contexts of different eras.	He reviews the “historical alterability of the concept of the literary” and its varying criteria through the centuries (p. 603-604).
Poststructuralism	Engages with Poststructuralist views on language and meaning by emphasizing that literature is a fluid concept constructed by social and cultural influences, without inherent essence.	Pettersson argues that literature “is a category introduced by individuals and societies for sorting texts” rather than an inherent truth (p. 603).
Genre Theory	Broadens Genre Theory by exploring how factual narratives can cross into literary territory under certain criteria, blurring traditional genre boundaries.	He illustrates that “factual discourse” can achieve “more or less of a literary character” depending on context and intention (p. 611).
Reader-Response Theory	Supports Reader-Response Theory by emphasizing the active role of the reader in finding value and meaning within texts, particularly factual ones that engage on a personal level.	Pettersson’s idea of “experience-inviting discourse” emphasizes reader interaction over the inherent qualities of the text (p. 607).
Literary Canon Theory	Questions the fixed boundaries of the literary canon by examining how certain factual works, like those by Churchill and Alexievich, can be recognized as literary depending on institutional contexts.	He highlights how Nobel awards and library classifications apply “fairly strict criteria,” yet these vary significantly (p. 606).
Narratology	Contributes to Narratology by offering a nuanced approach to factual narratives, recognizing that narrativity and literariness can intersect in unexpected ways.	Pettersson’s exploration of factual narratives with “literary quality” suggests narrative structure alone doesn’t define literature (p. 611).

Examples of Critiques Through “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson

Literary Work	Critique Through Pettersson’s Framework	Explanation
Winston Churchill’s “Give Us the Tools”	While primarily a factual speech, it achieves literary quality by inviting audiences to emotionally engage with Britain’s WWII resilience.	Pettersson suggests that factual narratives like Churchill’s speech can acquire literariness through “experience-inviting discourse” (p. 607).
Svetlana Alexievich’s The Unwomanly Face of War	Alexievich’s oral history combines factual testimonies with deeply personal perspectives, transforming historical facts into emotionally resonant literature.	Pettersson argues that factual works, though centered on assertion, can reach literary status when they invite reflective experiences (p. 611).
Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood	Capote’s blending of factual reporting with novelistic techniques creates a hybrid form that pushes traditional boundaries between fact and literature.	Pettersson’s critique would likely recognize Capote’s work as “factual discourse with literary quality,” crossing genre lines (p. 611).
Elie Wiesel’s Night	Wiesel’s factual recounting of the Holocaust invites readers to confront profound human suffering, balancing documentation with emotional depth.	By Pettersson’s standards, Night exemplifies how factual narratives can carry “experience-inviting” qualities, adding literary depth (p. 607).

Criticism Against “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson

• Ambiguity in Defining Literariness: Pettersson’s concept of “experience-inviting discourse” as a marker of literariness can be criticized as overly vague, leaving too much room for subjective interpretation. This ambiguity may undermine his attempt to provide a clearer framework for what constitutes literary quality.
• Overreliance on Contextual Variability: By emphasizing historical and cultural variability, Pettersson’s framework may risk relativism, making it difficult to apply consistent standards across literary analysis. This could make his model less practical for distinguishing between literary and non-literary texts.
• Downplaying the Role of Fictionality and Style: Critics might argue that Pettersson undervalues fictionality and stylistic qualities, which have been traditionally central to defining literature. By minimizing these elements, he may neglect essential aspects that many believe contribute to the uniqueness and appeal of literature.
• Limited Scope in Western Contexts: Pettersson explicitly focuses on Western literary traditions, which could be seen as limiting. His framework may not effectively address literariness in non-Western cultures, where oral traditions, diverse narrative forms, and other cultural factors play significant roles in defining literature.
• Insufficient Engagement with Alternative Literary Theories: Some may argue that Pettersson does not sufficiently address established theories like Formalism, Structuralism, or Poststructuralism, potentially weakening his position by not engaging in a more detailed critique of these perspectives.
• Potential for Over-Expansion of the Literary Canon: Pettersson’s inclusive approach could lead to an over-expansion of the literary canon, where nearly any factual discourse could be deemed literary. This could dilute the concept of literariness, making it challenging to maintain meaningful distinctions between different types of discourse.

Representative Quotations from “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“The concept of literature is a category introduced by individuals and societies for sorting texts…” (p. 603)	Pettersson emphasizes that literature is a social construct, shaped by collective cultural definitions rather than intrinsic qualities.
“The distinction between what is to be considered literature and what not is socially and historically constructed.” (p. 603)	This highlights the fluidity of literary categorization, implying that what counts as literature varies over time and by context.
“I will take it for granted that the distinction…has been applied in different ways and for different purposes.” (p. 603)	Pettersson acknowledges that literature’s boundaries are flexible and have served different roles across historical periods.
“Experience-inviting use of language as a particularly important element in our current ideas about what constitutes the literary.” (p. 607)	He introduces “experience-inviting” discourse as a central criterion for literariness, focusing on emotional and cognitive engagement.
“Factual discourse… is dominated by assertion… the speaker or writer vouches for the truth.” (p. 602)	Here, Pettersson defines factual discourse as truth-claiming, which contrasts with literature’s imaginative and reflective qualities.
“Literature, like all human utterance, comes with a presumption of relevance to the addressee.” (p. 607)	He suggests that literature is inherently meant to engage readers, providing relevance beyond mere information.
“Nothing prevents factual discourse from also entertaining the ambition to incite… a literary character.” (p. 611)	Pettersson argues that factual works can achieve literary value if they invite broader reflections, blurring traditional genre lines.
“I have consistently confined myself to Western culture.” (p. 611)	This limitation acknowledges that his conclusions may not apply universally, especially in non-Western literary traditions.
“Today, the general sentiment in the humanities is far more relativistic…” (p. 605)	He observes that contemporary literary studies are increasingly open to diverse interpretations, moving away from strict definitions.
“A more liberal understanding of what is literary comes into play in the presentation of literary awards…” (p. 606)	Pettersson notes that institutions like literary awards often use broader criteria for literariness, impacting what is considered literary.

Suggested Readings: “Factuality And Literariness” by Anders Pettersson

1. Pettersson, Anders. “Narrative Factuality: A Handbook.” In Narrative Factuality: A Handbook, edited by Monika Fludernik and Marie-Laure Ryan, 601-612. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2020.
2. Alexandrov, Vladimir E. “Literature, Literariness, and the Brain.” Comparative Literature, vol. 59, no. 2, 2007, pp. 97–118. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40279363. Accessed 6 Nov. 2024.
3. McNAMER, SARAH. “The Literariness of Literature and the History of Emotion.” PMLA, vol. 130, no. 5, 2015, pp. 1433–42. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44017160. Accessed 6 Nov. 2024.
4. Ramchand, Kenneth. “West Indian Literary History: Literariness, Orality and Periodization.” Callaloo, no. 34, 1988, pp. 95–110. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2931112. Accessed 6 Nov. 2024.