چکیده:
RésuméLes approches littéraires, à la fin du XXe siècle, ont essayé de redéfinir le statut du lecteur au sein de la création littéraire. Inspirée de ces approches littéraires, la recherche en didactique interroge, elle aussi, la façon dont le lecteur-apprenant pourrait établir une relation à la littérature et s'approprier le texte littéraire.C'est sous cet angle et dans le but d'avoir un aperçu sur les pratiques enseignantes en matière de lecture des textes littéraires en milieu universitaire iraniens, que la présente recherche a identifié, par le biais d’un questionnaire, les activités pédagogiques déclarées par vingt enseignants de littérature de différentes universités, ainsi que leurs points de vue sur la lecture de ces textes. En plus, ce questionnaire nous a permis de découvrir la place que le lecteur et sa subjectivité occupent dans les cours de littérature.Nous avons pu remarquer que les enseignants visent en priorité une transmission des connaissances littéraires, fondée sur la maitrise des interprétations données par le professeur. Mais, environ la moitié des enseignants ont prétendu accorder de l'importance aussi aux activités et aux enjeux qui favorisent la réaction et l'investissement personnels des étudiants.
رویکردهای ادبی در پایان قرن بیستم تلاش کردند تا جایگاه خواننده را در افرینش ادبی بازتعریف کنند. با الهام از این رویکردهای ادبی، پژوهش های اموزشی نیز روشی را که شاگردان در جایگاه خواننده، می توانند با ادبیات ارتباط برقرار کند و متن ادبی را ازان خود کنند، مورد بررسی قرار دادند.بر پایه این دیدگاه و به منظور نگاهی اجمالی به شیوه های تدریس خواندن متون ادبی در دانشگاه های ایران، این مقاله با استفاده از یک پرسشنامه، فعالیت های اموزشی اعلام شده توسط بیست استاد ادبیات فرانسه دانشگاه های مختلف، و همچنین دیدگاه انها را در مورد خواندن این متون، مورد مطالعه قرار داده است. علاوه بر این، این پرسشنامه به ما این امکان را داد که جایگاه خواننده و فردیت او را در کلاس ادبیات بررسی کنیم.طبق نتایج به دست امده، به این نتیجه رسیدیم که انتقال دانش ادبی به دانشجویان و تاکید بر تسلط انها بر تفاسیر ارايه شده، برای اساتید در اولویت قرار دارد. با این حال حدود نیمی از اساتید ادعا کردند که به مسايل و فعالیت هایی که اظهارنظر و مشارکت شخصی دانشجویان را تقویت می کنند نیز، اهمیت می دهند.
According to our experiences as professors of French language and literature at
university, the teaching of literature in Iranian heteroglot context, relying rather on a rational and
objective approach, has very often neglected the investment student subjective. In other words, there is
a general tendency to implement the approaches which dominated the programs of traditional pedagogy
until the 1960s in France and in French-speaking countries: the teaching of literature was there a means
of transmission of encyclopedic knowledge about authors, their works, genres, literary movements, etc.;
the situation which, in our view, more or less resembles that of our context of study. In fact, despite the
questioning of the notion of authorship (the function of the author), in recent decades, current practices
in the teaching of literary reading have not ceased to refer to the author, so that the subjectivity and
creativity of student readers were most often sidelined.
It was from the 1980s that, influenced by theories of reception, the didactics of literature witnessed an
epistemological break: the priority given to the text and its structure was replaced by the preponderance
of the reader and the phenomena of reception.
Since the emergence of the Constance school and its theories of reception based on the productive
dimension of reading, several theoreticians of literature have devoted themselves to the study of the
place that the reader occupies in the creation of the meaning of the 'work. Many researchers in didactics
of literature who, drawing on this reading approach, have subsequently taken into account the
subjectivity of the reader in teaching. Influenced by reading theorists, several didacticians have felt the
need to renew the teaching practices of literary reading by redefining the role of the reader, now
considered as subject-reader having a central place in the creation of the meaning of the text.
In this regard, the literary text, unlike specialized texts, does not imply a monosemic reading; the
meaning is not already there, expressed by the author, but is the result of the interaction between the text
and the reader. It is this interaction that pedagogy of literature must develop. In reality, the effect created
by the literary work and the reconstituted reception of the work by the reader are in permanent interaction in the construction of meaning. And it is precisely in this interaction that the reader can assume his role as subject-reader.
However, it is not easy, in a course of literary reading, in a heteroglot environment like Iran, to practice a didactics which highlights this interaction and which takes into account the implication of the student-readers in the literary work. Because, professors and their students are confronted with various issues that we will try to review in this search.
Therefore, our quantitative study, by a questionnaire administered to twenty French language and literature professors from several Iranian universities, identified the pedagogical practices for teaching the reading of literary texts, used by them, as well as to discover their points of view on the issues they face. In particular, we have attempted to account for the activities and strategies that professors declare they implement in class before, during and after the reading of literary texts, and to determine to what extent they take into account the subjectivity of students and their active participation in the construction of the meaning of the works to be read.
In general, traditional pedagogy occupies an important place in the concerns of teachers: situating the context of the text before reading, evaluating comprehension using questions, presenting an overview of currents and authors using excerpts, insisting on the dominant role of the teacher, etc. But we also noticed the desire to take some distance from traditional teaching by observing some attempts that make a certain place for the role of the reader-student in the reading of literary texts.
We have tried to understand what constitutes the issues of the reading of literary texts at university for professors. We can classify them into two categories in order to account for the way professors conceive of them: “transmission” issues and “experiential” issues.
By transmission issues, we mean those aimed at acquiring reading skills and literary knowledge. The emphasis here is on the text and the intentions of the author. Technical, cultural and reflective purposes are therefore valued. In this perspective, the student is considered as someone who reads to develop knowledge and skills in literature. Experiential issues can be linked to psycho-affective objectives, to those that seek to help students express themselves and build themselves as subjects. Consideration is given to students' reactions and their links to themes explored in the texts read.
Thus, according to the answers of the professors, the objectives of the teaching of the reading of literary texts and the practices carried out around these texts are multiple and they touch on issues of both transmissional and experiential orders. We have nevertheless noticed that Iranian professors give priority to transmission issues. Indeed, most of them aim primarily at transmitting literary knowledge (on currents, writers, genres, writing processes, etc.), based on the mastery of the interpretations given by the professor. But about half of the professors claimed to also value activities and issues that foster student personal response and engagement. For these professors, literary reading can also be perceived as the fruit of a participation in which the reader immerses himself and invests a part of his subjectivity by allowing himself a certain freedom of use of the text.
In general, according to the answers obtained, we can say that professors are aware of the importance of creativity and the involvement of students, but in their practices, these elements often seem to be stifled to satisfy a certain institutional form of literature: knowledge literature, unified and already-found explanations and interpretations. The concern to transmit this type of knowledge, gives rise to a teaching that is more transmissitional than experiential, which grants less importance to the subjectivity of the readers. However, literary reading is to adopt multiple postures (affective and involved, distanced and critical). Thus, thinking about an approach that takes into consideration a back and forth movement between different postures seems to us to be an avenue that deserves to be studied.
Ultimately, it should be noted that no means of evaluation alone seems able to provide us with all the information on the issues and problems of literary reading in a heteroglote university environment. If it seemed interesting to us to carry out a survey by questionnaire, we nevertheless wish to plead in favor of the search for complementarity in other diagnostic tools: a qualitative study to analysis the way in which the teaching of literary reading takes place, interviews with teachers and students, direct observation of classes, experimentation with different methodologies, etc.