I am not particularly sure if "literature- is a polemic in Comparative Literature (CL) because it seems that CL is the' polemic in literature. And yet, I wish to continue this discussion on what literature is, primarily because I have long wanted to ask Professor Torrecampo and the class on what their notion of literature is and what are included in it. I know that I cannot be a comparativist without a clear-cut concept of literature in the first place. Perhaps, in that sense, I am dealing with a polemic in CL, while putting it in the context of the term literature: that of which is genres and forms.
genrezhonrә/ n. 1 a kind of style, esp. of art or literature (e.g. novel, drama, satire). .
The concept of genre is instantly problematic, even to those in the academe. .
First, "are we entitled to discuss a genre without having studied all the works that constitute it?- Although it is rather impossible to study everything within a particular genre, it is indeed a logical question. Because merely knowing a fraction of something is not enough to construe the whole. But then again, doing so is impossible. With that limitation, we do not need to examine every instance of phenomenon before making a description of it "because the scientific method proceeds by deduction. "It is not the quantity of observations but the logical coherence of a theory that finally matters."" .
Second, "are genres finite in number or infinite?- The idea that genres are unlimited supports the first problem stated above. Tomahevsky wrote:.
Works are divided into large classes which are subdivided into types and species. In this way, moving down the ladder of genres, we move from abstract classes to concrete historical distinctions and even to specific works. .
The third problem is an issue of aesthetics. " It is pointless to speak of genres for the work of art is essentially unique, valuable because of what is original about it that distinguishes it from all other works, and not because of whatever in it may resemble them.