{"title":"Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem by Jennifer L. Fleissner (review)","authors":"Justine S. Murison","doi":"10.1353/sdn.2024.a928658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem</em> by Jennifer L. Fleissner <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Justine S. Murison </li> </ul> FLEISSNER, JENNIFER L. <em>Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem</em>. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2022. 504 pp. $105.00 hardcover; $35.00 cloth; $34.99 e-book. <p>Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and Adam Frank’s 1995 <em>Critical Inquiry</em> essay “Shame in the Cybernetic Fold: Reading Silvan Tomkins Now” brashly opened with a list of “a few things theory today knows,” and the first was that the distance of “any account of human beings or cultures” from “a biological basis is assumed to correlate almost precisely with its potential for doing justice to difference, to contingency, to performative force, and to the possibility of change.” What they were describing was a field predominated by explanations via cultural and linguistic construction, and what they initiated was a turn back to the material: human biology, affects over “feelings” and “emotions,” nonhuman animals, things, enmeshments and entanglements with the material world, and so on. Indeed, since their essay “entanglement” has become a privileged word in literary criticism, signaling a determination not to hierarchize cause and effect, actor and actant, human over the nonhuman and material world.</p> <p>Jennifer Fleissner’s <em>Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem</em> challenges these theoretical and methodological assumptions tied to the new materialisms. Fleissner’s main contention is that the struggle with and over the human will—that is, the capacity to make decisions, initiate action, and control impulses—is the central concern of the novel form and what drives modernity itself. As such, <em>Maladies of the Will</em> is at once an intellectual history, a new history of the novel, and a much-needed intervention for the general field of literary studies.</p> <p>Fleissner’s first step is to widen the historical perspective of scholars of the American novel. Her history, in fact, begins with Augustine. She argues that scholars of the novel tend to position the eighteenth century’s relationship to the will in a way that occludes rather than explains what the novel does. Here’s her main point: since Augustine (and through such Protestant steady sellers as John Bunyan’s <em>Pilgrim’s Progress</em>) internal struggles of the will have been the main feature of the first-person introspective narratives that influenced the novel form. And, as a reader of Augustine, Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards, or Mary Rowlandson would recognize, these struggles were about how to make sense of the peculiar phenomenon of knowing what is morally right but still doing the opposite. Edgar Allan Poe famously dubbed this the “imp of the perverse.” <strong>[End Page 208]</strong></p> <p>As Fleissner contends, eighteenth-century Anglo-American thinkers and authors developed two related ways to manage this imp. The first was to idealize the liberal subject—self-owning and rationally choosing. The second was through sentiment—the valorization of the feeling, sympathetic subject. In Fleissner’s argument these do not constitute the <em>invention</em> of modern subjectivity so much as two modes for <em>managing</em> what would be the modern predicament of the will: that in a secular world we are faced with feeling at once as if we have all the freedom and power to self-make and are yet utterly circumscribed by structures beyond our control.</p> <p>Fleissner delves into German philosophy and transatlantic medical theories to explain how maladies of the will—its illnesses and imps—constituted the sign of this emerging sense of modernity. Her chapters are anchored by major texts or authors from the American canon, renarrated and reinterpreted through this intellectual history: Chapter 1 focuses on Nathaniel Hawthorne’s <em>The Scarlet Letter</em>; Chapter 2 Herman Melville’s <em>Moby-Dick</em>; Chapter 3 Elizabeth Stoddard’s <em>The Morgesons</em>; Chapter 4 the James brothers; Chapter 5 Frank Norris’s <em>Vandover and the Brute</em> and other naturalist writers; and Chapter 6 on Black writing at the turn of the twentieth century with a special focus on Charles Chesnutt’s <em>The Marrow of Tradition</em>. As this outline suggests, Fleissner is concerned in large part with exceptional cases and with understanding the relation of novels traditionally classified as “romances” (<em>The Scarlet Letter</em>, <em>Moby-Dick</em>) to those...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":54138,"journal":{"name":"STUDIES IN THE NOVEL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"STUDIES IN THE NOVEL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/sdn.2024.a928658","RegionNum":2,"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
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:
Reviewed by:
Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem by Jennifer L. Fleissner
Justine S. Murison
FLEISSNER, JENNIFER L. Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2022. 504 pp. $105.00 hardcover; $35.00 cloth; $34.99 e-book.
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and Adam Frank’s 1995 Critical Inquiry essay “Shame in the Cybernetic Fold: Reading Silvan Tomkins Now” brashly opened with a list of “a few things theory today knows,” and the first was that the distance of “any account of human beings or cultures” from “a biological basis is assumed to correlate almost precisely with its potential for doing justice to difference, to contingency, to performative force, and to the possibility of change.” What they were describing was a field predominated by explanations via cultural and linguistic construction, and what they initiated was a turn back to the material: human biology, affects over “feelings” and “emotions,” nonhuman animals, things, enmeshments and entanglements with the material world, and so on. Indeed, since their essay “entanglement” has become a privileged word in literary criticism, signaling a determination not to hierarchize cause and effect, actor and actant, human over the nonhuman and material world.
Jennifer Fleissner’s Maladies of the Will: The American Novel and the Modernity Problem challenges these theoretical and methodological assumptions tied to the new materialisms. Fleissner’s main contention is that the struggle with and over the human will—that is, the capacity to make decisions, initiate action, and control impulses—is the central concern of the novel form and what drives modernity itself. As such, Maladies of the Will is at once an intellectual history, a new history of the novel, and a much-needed intervention for the general field of literary studies.
Fleissner’s first step is to widen the historical perspective of scholars of the American novel. Her history, in fact, begins with Augustine. She argues that scholars of the novel tend to position the eighteenth century’s relationship to the will in a way that occludes rather than explains what the novel does. Here’s her main point: since Augustine (and through such Protestant steady sellers as John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress) internal struggles of the will have been the main feature of the first-person introspective narratives that influenced the novel form. And, as a reader of Augustine, Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards, or Mary Rowlandson would recognize, these struggles were about how to make sense of the peculiar phenomenon of knowing what is morally right but still doing the opposite. Edgar Allan Poe famously dubbed this the “imp of the perverse.” [End Page 208]
As Fleissner contends, eighteenth-century Anglo-American thinkers and authors developed two related ways to manage this imp. The first was to idealize the liberal subject—self-owning and rationally choosing. The second was through sentiment—the valorization of the feeling, sympathetic subject. In Fleissner’s argument these do not constitute the invention of modern subjectivity so much as two modes for managing what would be the modern predicament of the will: that in a secular world we are faced with feeling at once as if we have all the freedom and power to self-make and are yet utterly circumscribed by structures beyond our control.
Fleissner delves into German philosophy and transatlantic medical theories to explain how maladies of the will—its illnesses and imps—constituted the sign of this emerging sense of modernity. Her chapters are anchored by major texts or authors from the American canon, renarrated and reinterpreted through this intellectual history: Chapter 1 focuses on Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter; Chapter 2 Herman Melville’s Moby-Dick; Chapter 3 Elizabeth Stoddard’s The Morgesons; Chapter 4 the James brothers; Chapter 5 Frank Norris’s Vandover and the Brute and other naturalist writers; and Chapter 6 on Black writing at the turn of the twentieth century with a special focus on Charles Chesnutt’s The Marrow of Tradition. As this outline suggests, Fleissner is concerned in large part with exceptional cases and with understanding the relation of novels traditionally classified as “romances” (The Scarlet Letter, Moby-Dick) to those...
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者: 意志的弊病:Jennifer L. Fleissner 著,Justine S. Murison 译 FLEISSNER, JENNIFER L. Maladies of the Will:美国小说与现代性问题》。芝加哥和伦敦:芝加哥大学出版社,2022 年。504 pp.精装本 105.00 美元;布本 35.00 美元;电子书 34.99 美元。伊芙-科索夫斯基-塞奇威克和亚当-弗兰克 1995 年发表的《批判性探索》(Critical Inquiry)一文《网络褶皱中的羞耻》(Shame in the Cybernetic Fold:一开篇,他们就肆无忌惮地列举了 "当今理论所知道的几件事情",其中第一件就是 "关于人类或文化的任何论述 "与 "生物学基础 "之间的距离,"被假定为几乎恰好与其公正对待差异、偶然性、表演力和变革可能性的潜力相关联"。他们所描述的是一个以通过文化和语言建构进行解释为主导的领域,而他们所倡导的则是回归物质:人类生物学、对 "感觉 "和 "情感 "的影响、非人类动物、事物、与物质世界的缠绕和纠结,等等。事实上,自他们的文章发表以来,"纠缠 "已成为文学评论中的一个特权词,表明人们决心不再将因果、行为者与被行为者、人类与非人类和物质世界分等级。詹妮弗-弗莱斯纳(Jennifer Fleissner)的《意志的弊病》(Maladies of the Will:美国小说与现代性问题》挑战了这些与新唯物主义相关的理论和方法假设。弗莱斯纳的主要论点是,与人的意志--即做出决定、发起行动和控制冲动的能力--的斗争是小说形式的核心问题,也是现代性本身的驱动力。因此,《意志的弊病》既是一部思想史,也是一部新的小说史,更是文学研究领域亟需的介入之作。弗莱斯纳的第一步是拓宽美国小说学者的历史视野。事实上,她的历史始于奥古斯丁。她认为,研究小说的学者往往将十八世纪与意志的关系定位在遮蔽而非解释小说的作用上。她的主要观点如下:自奥古斯丁(以及约翰-班扬的《朝圣者的进步》等新教畅销书)以来,意志的内部斗争一直是影响小说形式的第一人称自省叙事的主要特征。而且,正如奥古斯丁、班扬、乔纳森-爱德华兹或玛丽-罗兰森的读者所认识到的,这些挣扎是关于如何理解明知道德上正确的事情却仍然反其道而行之的奇特现象。埃德加-爱伦-坡(Edgar Allan Poe)将这种现象称为 "反常的小恶魔"。[弗莱斯纳认为,十八世纪的英美思想家和作家发展出两种相关的方法来管理这种 "反常的小恶魔"。第一种是理想化自由主体--自我拥有和理性选择。第二种是通过情感--对有感情、有同情心的主体的珍视。在弗莱斯纳的论证中,这些并不构成现代主体性的发明,而只是管理现代意志困境的两种模式:在一个世俗的世界中,我们既感到自己拥有自我创造的所有自由和权力,又被我们无法控制的结构所完全限制。弗莱斯纳深入研究了德国哲学和跨大西洋医学理论,解释了意志的弊病--它的疾病和幽灵--是如何构成这种新兴现代感的标志。她的章节以美国经典中的主要文本或作家为基础,通过这一思想史重新叙述和诠释:第一章重点介绍了纳撒尼尔-霍桑的《红字》;第二章介绍了赫尔曼-梅尔维尔的《白鲸记》;第三章介绍了伊丽莎白-斯托达德的《莫吉森一家》;第四章介绍了詹姆斯兄弟;第五章介绍了弗兰克-诺里斯的《凡多弗和野蛮人》以及其他自然主义作家;第六章介绍了二十世纪之交的黑人写作,特别是查尔斯-切斯纳特的《传统的骨髓》。正如上述提纲所示,弗莱斯纳在很大程度上关注的是例外情况,以及如何理解传统上被归类为 "浪漫主义 "的小说(《红字》、《白鲸》)与那些...
期刊介绍:
From its inception, Studies in the Novel has been dedicated to building a scholarly community around the world-making potentialities of the novel. Studies in the Novel started as an idea among several members of the English Department of the University of North Texas during the summer of 1965. They determined that there was a need for a journal “devoted to publishing critical and scholarly articles on the novel with no restrictions on either chronology or nationality of the novelists studied.” The founding editor, University of North Texas professor of contemporary literature James W. Lee, envisioned a journal of international scope and influence. Since then, Studies in the Novel has staked its reputation upon publishing incisive scholarship on the canon-forming and cutting-edge novelists that have shaped the genre’s rich history. The journal continues to break new ground by promoting new theoretical approaches, a broader international scope, and an engagement with the contemporary novel as a form of social critique.