Complex relations of a lie and a human world are a big topic in literature and myths. Firstly this topic is open in a broader and more general sense with a ques-tion on a lie being a defect or a competence. Next the author applies philological and historic approach in reading ancient Indo European and particularly Slavon-ic mythological traditions and he observes an unusual type of the lie closely re-lated to wisdom and authority. He tries to add heavenly wily lawyers, which lie or commit perjury with beneficial cosmogonic or sociogenic effect, to the Dumézil´s catalogue of unusual characters of Indo European mythology. Some characters from selected Slavonic mythopoetic traditions are pointed out.
The study is based on the empirical study of literature (Siegfried S. Schmidt), so it does not introduce literature as a collection of texts to be interpreted, but as a structured collection of actions within the social system – literature. It pays attention to media and historical dimension in literary performers´ generation characteristics on young – old axis (“digital aboriginals“ – “gutenbergian fossils“, textualists). It “dusts of“ the concept of secondary orality (Walter J. Ong) and radicalises it. With the ref-erence to youth slam poetry it shows updating generation tension as difference among orality and textuality. The author calls attention to psychodynamic peculiarities of social network language using grafolect as text language as a contrast, he also points out possibilities and limits of literary “textualism“ as a media determined wad of scientific approaches.
In terms of methodology, the study utilizes critical discourse analysis and inter-discourse theory. It analyses two texts dealing with the issues of university bu-reaucracy, which combine elements of both science and literary procedure: J. Hvorecký’s Testament vedca (2015) and W. Halffman’s & H. Radder’s The Academic Manifesto: From an Occupied to a Public University (2015). The dis-course analysis compares contradictory narratives related to universities (J. Hvorecký’s narrative regarding vigorous managerialism of universities as the only possibility to save universities from total collapse and the “public uni-versity” narrative proposed by the philosophers of science W. Halffman & H. Radder) and problematizes the emphasized difference between bureau-cracy and managerialism.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.