{"title":"A Partial Truth (Poems 2015–19) by Christopher Norris (review)","authors":"Niall Gildea","doi":"10.1353/sub.2023.a907153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: A Partial Truth (Poems 2015–19) by Christopher Norris Niall Gildea Norris, Christopher. A Partial Truth (Poems 2015–19). The Seventh Quarry Press, 2019. 133pp. “No interval but some event takes place.” (Norris, “Freeze-Frame,” A Partial Truth) A Partial Truth, a collection of thirty-seven pieces, is the seventh volume of poetry by philosopher and literary theorist Christopher Norris. Nobody familiar with Norris’s distinguished career will be surprised to learn that his recent turn to versification is not a repudiation of intellectual and rhetorical seriousness, but a re-emphasis of the same using resources not typically found in academic prose. Norris, an interdisciplinarian long before that term became a slogan, has in his work clocked up considerable epistemological mileage across diverse terrain, his critical friendship with deconstruction leading him to important interventions in analytic and Continental philosophy, institutional critique, philosophy of science and mathematics, legal studies, music, politics and, after all, creative criticism. Creative criticism is a relatively embryonic genre, until recently typified generally by a prose that owes a debt to Jacques Derrida’s Cir-confession, Glas and La carte postale. This is a style that foregrounds the philosophical unsaid – the repressed autobiographical, desirous, and otherwise messy constituents of that canon. It does so in part by jettisoning the academic politesse, and let’s say timidity, which help maintain such statutes of limitation. In a more specific way, creative criticism may be understood as a Romantic development set in train by the “Yale School” of deconstruction and its fellow travelers, straining in their own ways against the subordinate role of the reader and critic instituted by the likes of Matthew Arnold and T. S. Eliot. In the foreword to his 2017 volume The Winnowing Fan, Norris at once compliments this “strong” critical rebelliousness (xii), and critiques its ecstatic, quasi-apocalyptic hubris, provisionally aligning his own creative criticism with the “poetic diction” (xxi) of eighteenth-century figures such as Dryden and Pope. It is an analogy with caveats – not least Norris’s stated allergy to the “air of arrogance” (Tempus-Fugitives ix) of [End Page 122] their heavily end-stopped tendentiousness – but one which schematizes a poetics that both carries a definite argument and could not make this argument otherwise than in a manner reliant on verse’s formal properties. Note, however, the fact that Norris takes his distance from both strong criticism and those eighteenth-century essayists on the grounds of their shared self-assurance. A steadier presiding influence is William Empson, whose enmity towards Eliotic New Criticism, which “fixes a prescriptive gulf between poetry and other kinds of discourse,” makes him a political forebear, dissenting from modern forms of literary historical doctrinalism, specifically “that whole anti-rationalist complex of ideas that made the discontinuity between poetic and non-poetic language into a shibboleth of aesthetic, ethical, and (though rarely advertised as such) socio-political principle” (Tempus-Fugitives xix–xx). Norris is no straightforward disciple of Empson – who regarded Derrida, and the other “horrible Frenchmen” Norris used to invite him to read, as “so very disgusting, in a simple moral or social way, that I cannot stomach them” (qtd. in Haffenden 52). And yet, one constant quality of both Norris’s verse and prose criticism is a welcome sobriety of explication when it comes to the more recondite or outright flamboyant enclaves of modern European thought. A Partial Truth, and Norris’s books of verse generally, are explicit in outlining the ways in which his poetry functions as a reaction to the diaristic, mumbling slackness of much contemporary poetry; but does his turn to verse also indicate some reaction to contemporary theory? A Partial Truth’s “Foreword,” with modesty, states that “[i]f these poems have any distinctive merit then it lies in the treatment of interesting ideas in a way that deploys certain formal means to draw out complexities and further implications that would lie beyond the reach of a prose rendition” (14). We will specify some of the relations between form and discursive complexity presently, but for now, it is worth suggesting that Norris’s commitment to verse forms of historically recognizable kinds forecloses from him the mealy-mouthed, argumentatively fugitive character of...","PeriodicalId":45831,"journal":{"name":"SUB-STANCE","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SUB-STANCE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/sub.2023.a907153","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Reviewed by: A Partial Truth (Poems 2015–19) by Christopher Norris Niall Gildea Norris, Christopher. A Partial Truth (Poems 2015–19). The Seventh Quarry Press, 2019. 133pp. “No interval but some event takes place.” (Norris, “Freeze-Frame,” A Partial Truth) A Partial Truth, a collection of thirty-seven pieces, is the seventh volume of poetry by philosopher and literary theorist Christopher Norris. Nobody familiar with Norris’s distinguished career will be surprised to learn that his recent turn to versification is not a repudiation of intellectual and rhetorical seriousness, but a re-emphasis of the same using resources not typically found in academic prose. Norris, an interdisciplinarian long before that term became a slogan, has in his work clocked up considerable epistemological mileage across diverse terrain, his critical friendship with deconstruction leading him to important interventions in analytic and Continental philosophy, institutional critique, philosophy of science and mathematics, legal studies, music, politics and, after all, creative criticism. Creative criticism is a relatively embryonic genre, until recently typified generally by a prose that owes a debt to Jacques Derrida’s Cir-confession, Glas and La carte postale. This is a style that foregrounds the philosophical unsaid – the repressed autobiographical, desirous, and otherwise messy constituents of that canon. It does so in part by jettisoning the academic politesse, and let’s say timidity, which help maintain such statutes of limitation. In a more specific way, creative criticism may be understood as a Romantic development set in train by the “Yale School” of deconstruction and its fellow travelers, straining in their own ways against the subordinate role of the reader and critic instituted by the likes of Matthew Arnold and T. S. Eliot. In the foreword to his 2017 volume The Winnowing Fan, Norris at once compliments this “strong” critical rebelliousness (xii), and critiques its ecstatic, quasi-apocalyptic hubris, provisionally aligning his own creative criticism with the “poetic diction” (xxi) of eighteenth-century figures such as Dryden and Pope. It is an analogy with caveats – not least Norris’s stated allergy to the “air of arrogance” (Tempus-Fugitives ix) of [End Page 122] their heavily end-stopped tendentiousness – but one which schematizes a poetics that both carries a definite argument and could not make this argument otherwise than in a manner reliant on verse’s formal properties. Note, however, the fact that Norris takes his distance from both strong criticism and those eighteenth-century essayists on the grounds of their shared self-assurance. A steadier presiding influence is William Empson, whose enmity towards Eliotic New Criticism, which “fixes a prescriptive gulf between poetry and other kinds of discourse,” makes him a political forebear, dissenting from modern forms of literary historical doctrinalism, specifically “that whole anti-rationalist complex of ideas that made the discontinuity between poetic and non-poetic language into a shibboleth of aesthetic, ethical, and (though rarely advertised as such) socio-political principle” (Tempus-Fugitives xix–xx). Norris is no straightforward disciple of Empson – who regarded Derrida, and the other “horrible Frenchmen” Norris used to invite him to read, as “so very disgusting, in a simple moral or social way, that I cannot stomach them” (qtd. in Haffenden 52). And yet, one constant quality of both Norris’s verse and prose criticism is a welcome sobriety of explication when it comes to the more recondite or outright flamboyant enclaves of modern European thought. A Partial Truth, and Norris’s books of verse generally, are explicit in outlining the ways in which his poetry functions as a reaction to the diaristic, mumbling slackness of much contemporary poetry; but does his turn to verse also indicate some reaction to contemporary theory? A Partial Truth’s “Foreword,” with modesty, states that “[i]f these poems have any distinctive merit then it lies in the treatment of interesting ideas in a way that deploys certain formal means to draw out complexities and further implications that would lie beyond the reach of a prose rendition” (14). We will specify some of the relations between form and discursive complexity presently, but for now, it is worth suggesting that Norris’s commitment to verse forms of historically recognizable kinds forecloses from him the mealy-mouthed, argumentatively fugitive character of...
书评:克里斯托弗·诺里斯的《部分真相》(诗歌2015-19)部分真相(诗歌2015-19)。第七采石场出版社,2019。133页。“没有间隔,但发生了一些事件。(诺里斯,《定格》,《部分真理》)《部分真理》是哲学家、文学理论家克里斯托弗·诺里斯的第七部诗集,共37篇。熟悉诺里斯杰出职业生涯的人都不会惊讶地发现,他最近转向诗歌并不是对智力和修辞严肃性的否定,而是重新强调了同样的东西,使用了在学术散文中通常找不到的资源。早在这个词成为一个口号之前,诺里斯就已经是一个跨学科的人了,在他的工作中,他在不同的领域积累了相当多的认识论里程,他与解构主义的批判友谊使他在分析哲学和欧陆哲学、制度批判、科学哲学和数学、法律研究、音乐、政治,以及创造性批评方面进行了重要的干预。创造性批评是一种相对萌芽的体裁,直到最近才以雅克·德里达(Jacques Derrida)的《自白》(cirl -confession)、《玻璃》(Glas)和《邮政菜单》(La carte postale)的散文为代表。这是一种突出哲学的未言说的风格——被压抑的自传体、欲望和其他混乱的经典成分。它之所以能做到这一点,部分原因是抛弃了学术上的礼貌,让我们说胆怯,这有助于维持这种诉讼时效。从更具体的角度来看,创造性批评可以被理解为一种浪漫主义的发展,它是由解构主义的“耶鲁学派”及其同行者设定的,他们以自己的方式与马修·阿诺德(Matthew Arnold)和t·s·艾略特(T. S. Eliot)等人建立的读者和评论家的从属角色作斗争。在他2017年出版的《扇子》一书的前言中,诺里斯立即赞扬了这种“强烈的”批判叛逆(第十二章),并批评了其狂喜的、准世界末日的傲慢,暂时将他自己的创造性批评与18世纪人物(如德莱顿和蒲伯)的“诗意措辞”(二十一章)结合起来。这是一个与警告的类比-不仅仅是诺里斯对“傲慢的空气”的过敏(tempuss -逃犯ix)[结束页122]他们的严重结束的倾向-但是一个图式化的诗学,既带有明确的论点,也不能做出这种论点,除非以一种依赖于诗歌形式属性的方式。然而,请注意,诺里斯与强烈的批评和那些18世纪的散文家都保持距离,因为他们都有自信。一个更稳定的主导影响是威廉·恩普森,他对艾略特新批评主义的敌意,艾略特新批评主义“在诗歌和其他类型的话语之间固定了一条规定性的鸿沟”,使他成为一个政治先驱,反对现代形式的文学历史教条主义,特别是“整个反理性主义的复杂思想,使诗歌和非诗歌语言之间的不连续性成为美学,伦理和(尽管很少宣传这样)社会政治原则的陈词滥调”(天普斯-逃亡者xix-xx)。诺里斯并不是Empson的直接弟子,他认为德里达和诺里斯曾经邀请他阅读的其他“可怕的法国人”“从简单的道德或社会角度来看,非常令人厌恶,以至于我无法忍受他们”(qtd)。在哈芬登52)。然而,诺里斯的诗文批评和散文批评的一个不变的品质是,当涉及到现代欧洲思想的更深奥或直接浮夸的飞地时,他的解释是受欢迎的冷静。《部分真理》和诺里斯的诗集都明确地概述了他的诗歌是如何对当代诗歌的日记式、含糊不清的懒散做出反应的;但他转向诗歌是否也表明了他对当代理论的某种反应呢?《部分真理》的前言谦虚地写道:“如果这些诗有任何独特的优点,那么它就在于以一种方式处理有趣的想法,这种方式运用了某种正式的手段来描绘复杂性和进一步的含义,这是散文无法达到的。”我们将具体说明形式和话语复杂性之间的关系,但是现在,值得提出的是诺里斯对历史上可识别的诗歌形式的承诺排除了他的拐弯抹角,争论不定的性格。
期刊介绍:
SubStance has a long-standing reputation for publishing innovative work on literature and culture. While its main focus has been on French literature and continental theory, the journal is known for its openness to original thinking in all the discourses that interact with literature, including philosophy, natural and social sciences, and the arts. Join the discerning readers of SubStance who enjoy crossing borders and challenging limits.