Reflexivity’s Ontological Turn: From Cybernetics to Autopoiesis in “The Circular Ruins” and The People of Paper

IF 0.6 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE, AMERICAN AMERICAN LITERATURE Pub Date : 2023-09-13 DOI:10.1215/00029831-10950779
T. J. Martinson
{"title":"Reflexivity’s Ontological Turn: From Cybernetics to Autopoiesis in “The Circular Ruins” and <i>The People of Paper</i>","authors":"T. J. Martinson","doi":"10.1215/00029831-10950779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While postmodern metafiction (or reflexive fiction) is commonly positioned outside the scope of the Ontological Turn due to metafiction’s association with postmodernism’s insistence on “world as text,” this article argues that metafiction’s proximity to scientific theories of reflexivity engenders a shift toward what the article calls body as text, a shift that is synchronous with reflexivity’s evolution from cybernetics to biological autopoiesis. To trace metafiction’s aesthetic evolution from world as text to body as text, the article examines Jorge Luis Borges’s short story “The Circular Ruins” (1940) alongside early-order cybernetic theories of reflexivity before examining Salvador Plascencia’s The People of Paper (2005) alongside later theories of biological autopoiesis. While both narratives demonstrate an interest in the world-building powers of the text, the article argues that Plascencia’s novel demonstrates reflexivity’s autopoietic ability to examine the interstitial relationship between material embodiment and nonhuman agencies. By moving away from Borgesian self-regulation toward self-assembly, The People of Paper gradually sheds the epistemological preoccupations of its world-as-text aesthetic in favor a more ontological body-as-text aesthetic, thereby opening up the possibility of interpreting Plascencia’s novel as an aestheticization not of the construction of reality but of the construction of the body itself. In marking a distinction between world-as-text metafiction and body-as-text metafiction, the latter emerges as a uniquely useful heuristic in the Ontological Turn for modeling molecular embodiment and nonhuman agency.","PeriodicalId":45756,"journal":{"name":"AMERICAN LITERATURE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMERICAN LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00029831-10950779","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, AMERICAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract While postmodern metafiction (or reflexive fiction) is commonly positioned outside the scope of the Ontological Turn due to metafiction’s association with postmodernism’s insistence on “world as text,” this article argues that metafiction’s proximity to scientific theories of reflexivity engenders a shift toward what the article calls body as text, a shift that is synchronous with reflexivity’s evolution from cybernetics to biological autopoiesis. To trace metafiction’s aesthetic evolution from world as text to body as text, the article examines Jorge Luis Borges’s short story “The Circular Ruins” (1940) alongside early-order cybernetic theories of reflexivity before examining Salvador Plascencia’s The People of Paper (2005) alongside later theories of biological autopoiesis. While both narratives demonstrate an interest in the world-building powers of the text, the article argues that Plascencia’s novel demonstrates reflexivity’s autopoietic ability to examine the interstitial relationship between material embodiment and nonhuman agencies. By moving away from Borgesian self-regulation toward self-assembly, The People of Paper gradually sheds the epistemological preoccupations of its world-as-text aesthetic in favor a more ontological body-as-text aesthetic, thereby opening up the possibility of interpreting Plascencia’s novel as an aestheticization not of the construction of reality but of the construction of the body itself. In marking a distinction between world-as-text metafiction and body-as-text metafiction, the latter emerges as a uniquely useful heuristic in the Ontological Turn for modeling molecular embodiment and nonhuman agency.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
反身性的本体论转向:《圆形废墟》和《纸上的人》中从控制论到自创生
虽然后现代元小说(或反思性小说)通常被定位在本体论转向的范围之外,因为元小说与后现代主义坚持“世界作为文本”的联系,但本文认为,元小说与反思性的科学理论的接近导致了一种向文章所说的身体作为文本的转变,这种转变与反思性从控制论到生物自创生的进化是同步的。为了追溯元小说从以世界为文本到以身体为文本的美学演变,本文考察了Jorge Luis Borges的短篇小说《圆形废墟》(1940)和早期的反身性控制论,然后考察了Salvador Plascencia的《纸上的人》(2005)和后来的生物自创生理论。虽然这两种叙述都表现出对文本世界建设力量的兴趣,但文章认为,普拉森西亚的小说展示了反身性的自创生能力,可以检查物质体现和非人类机构之间的间隙关系。通过从博尔赫斯式的自我调节走向自我组装,《纸上的人》逐渐摆脱了认识论上对世界作为文本美学的关注,而更倾向于本体论上的身体作为文本美学,从而开启了将普拉森西亚的小说解读为一种审美化的可能性,这种审美化不是对现实的建构,而是对身体本身的建构。在区分作为文本的世界元虚构和作为文本的身体元虚构时,后者在本体论转向中作为一种独特有用的启发式出现,用于建模分子具体化和非人类能动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
AMERICAN LITERATURE
AMERICAN LITERATURE LITERATURE, AMERICAN-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: American Literature has been regarded since its inception as the preeminent periodical in its field. Each issue contains articles covering the works of several American authors—from colonial to contemporary—as well as an extensive book review section; a “Brief Mention” section offering citations of new editions and reprints, collections, anthologies, and other professional books; and an “Announcements” section that keeps readers up-to-date on prizes, competitions, conferences, grants, and publishing opportunities.
期刊最新文献
Ouch: Pain, Heard and Referred Taxonomy of an Enslaved Heart “Alive in Every Fibre”: Chopin and Wharton on Pain, Pleasure, and Private Feeling Pain after 2020, An Introduction National Wounds and Gendered Harm: Reframing Abortion Pain in The Worst of Times
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1