"An evill race": Utopia, Spenser, and the Dangers of Cultural Hybridity

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 N/A MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES Pub Date : 2022-11-15 DOI:10.1353/cjm.2022.0005
Kersti Francis
{"title":"\"An evill race\": Utopia, Spenser, and the Dangers of Cultural Hybridity","authors":"Kersti Francis","doi":"10.1353/cjm.2022.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The potential of interracial, interreligious, and intercultural mixing—that is, cultural hybridity—was a frequent source of anxiety in the literature of sixteenth-century England. Following the start of the Tudor conquest of Ireland, contemporary writers and makers of Anglo-Irish policy emphasized that Irish culture, especially its language, laws, and customs, was seen as debilitating to English hegemony and demanded eradication. This article examines Tudor attitudes toward colonialization and cultural hybridity in two texts, Thomas More's Utopia (1516) and Edmund Spenser's A View of the Present State of Ire-land (1596), each of which focus on the position of one product of cultural intermarriage, the hybrid child. Through an interrogation of both More's portrayal of an idealized aftermath of colonial enterprise and Spenser's genocidal fantasy of English imperialism in Ire-land, I argue that cultural hybridity is simultaneously rendered integral and dangerous to the former and inherently destructive to the latter due to the ontological liminality of the hybrid child.","PeriodicalId":53903,"journal":{"name":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cjm.2022.0005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:The potential of interracial, interreligious, and intercultural mixing—that is, cultural hybridity—was a frequent source of anxiety in the literature of sixteenth-century England. Following the start of the Tudor conquest of Ireland, contemporary writers and makers of Anglo-Irish policy emphasized that Irish culture, especially its language, laws, and customs, was seen as debilitating to English hegemony and demanded eradication. This article examines Tudor attitudes toward colonialization and cultural hybridity in two texts, Thomas More's Utopia (1516) and Edmund Spenser's A View of the Present State of Ire-land (1596), each of which focus on the position of one product of cultural intermarriage, the hybrid child. Through an interrogation of both More's portrayal of an idealized aftermath of colonial enterprise and Spenser's genocidal fantasy of English imperialism in Ire-land, I argue that cultural hybridity is simultaneously rendered integral and dangerous to the former and inherently destructive to the latter due to the ontological liminality of the hybrid child.
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
“邪恶种族”:乌托邦、斯宾塞与文化混杂的危险
摘要:在16世纪的英国文学中,种族间、宗教间和文化间混合的潜力——即文化混杂——是焦虑的常见来源。都铎王朝开始征服爱尔兰后,当代作家和英爱政策制定者强调,爱尔兰文化,尤其是其语言、法律和习俗,被视为削弱了英国霸权,并要求根除。本文在托马斯·莫尔(Thomas More)的《乌托邦》(1516)和埃德蒙·斯宾塞(Edmund Spenser)的《爱尔兰现状》(1596)这两本书中考察了都铎王朝对殖民主义和文化混杂的态度,每本书都聚焦于文化异族通婚的一个产物——混血儿的地位。通过对莫尔对殖民事业理想化后果的刻画和斯宾塞对英国帝国主义在爱尔兰的种族灭绝幻想的审问,我认为,由于混血儿的本体论界限,文化混杂性对前者来说是不可分割的、危险的,对后者来说是内在的破坏性。
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Comitatus: A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies publishes articles by graduate students and recent PhDs in any field of medieval and Renaissance studies. The journal maintains a tradition of gathering work from across disciplines, with a special interest in articles that have an interdisciplinary or cross-cultural scope.
期刊最新文献
Women’s Lives: Self-Representation, Reception and Appropriation in the Middle Ages ed. by Daniel Armenti and Nahir I. Otaño Gracia (review) The Complete History of the Black Death by Ole J. Benedictow (review) Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting by Julius von Schlosser, and: Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire by Jeffrey Chipps Smith (review) Bishop Æthelwold, His Followers, and Saints’ Cults in Early Medieval England: Power, Belief, and Religious Reform by Alison Hudson (review) Writing Old Age and Impairment in Late Medieval England by Will Rogers (review)
×
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