Speculative Capital, Speculative Reading: The Materialist Ethics of Fiction in Charles Dickens’s Our Mutual Friend and The Pickwick Papers

IF 0.6 0 LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES Dickens Studies Annual Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.5325/dickstudannu.54.2.0121
Peter Katz
{"title":"Speculative Capital, Speculative Reading: The Materialist Ethics of Fiction in Charles Dickens’s Our Mutual Friend and The Pickwick Papers","authors":"Peter Katz","doi":"10.5325/dickstudannu.54.2.0121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Dickens’s novels explicitly critique the disaggregation of economics and morality in speculative capitalism. This article argues that the novels equally condemn the logic of speculation in other forms: speculative knowledge and speculations about other people’s interiors. All these logics depend on a process of distancing from materiality to create wealth: speculation on value is far removed from gold, and a character’s interiority is far from the clothing that one might interpret to signify their feelings. And so, just as to remove morality from economic relationships dehumanizes people, to remove materiality from reading dehumanizes literature. In place of speculative logic, Dickens’s fiction magnifies surfaces. To critique speculative reading in his novels, Dickens creates characters who read texts and people metaphorically for their own social and monetary gain: literary men. Through Arthur Clennam’s speculative gaze in Little Dorrit, Silas Wegg’s disembodied leg in Our Mutual Friend, and Pickwick’s discovery of a very nice rock in The Pickwick Papers, this article argues that the critique of speculation in these texts creates a materialist ethics of reading—one that foregrounds surface over interpretation.","PeriodicalId":53232,"journal":{"name":"Dickens Studies Annual","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dickens Studies Annual","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/dickstudannu.54.2.0121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dickens’s novels explicitly critique the disaggregation of economics and morality in speculative capitalism. This article argues that the novels equally condemn the logic of speculation in other forms: speculative knowledge and speculations about other people’s interiors. All these logics depend on a process of distancing from materiality to create wealth: speculation on value is far removed from gold, and a character’s interiority is far from the clothing that one might interpret to signify their feelings. And so, just as to remove morality from economic relationships dehumanizes people, to remove materiality from reading dehumanizes literature. In place of speculative logic, Dickens’s fiction magnifies surfaces. To critique speculative reading in his novels, Dickens creates characters who read texts and people metaphorically for their own social and monetary gain: literary men. Through Arthur Clennam’s speculative gaze in Little Dorrit, Silas Wegg’s disembodied leg in Our Mutual Friend, and Pickwick’s discovery of a very nice rock in The Pickwick Papers, this article argues that the critique of speculation in these texts creates a materialist ethics of reading—one that foregrounds surface over interpretation.
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
投机资本,投机阅读:狄更斯《我们共同的朋友》和《匹克威克外传》中小说的唯物主义伦理
狄更斯的小说明确批判了投机资本主义中经济和道德的解体。本文认为,小说同样谴责了其他形式的思辨逻辑:思辨知识和对他人内心的思辨。所有这些逻辑都取决于一个远离物质性来创造财富的过程:对价值的猜测与黄金相去甚远,角色的内在性与人们可能解读为表达其情感的服装相去甚远。因此,正如从经济关系中去除道德会使人失去人性一样,从阅读中去除物质性会使文学失去人性。代替思辨逻辑,狄更斯的小说放大了表面。为了批判小说中的思辨阅读,狄更斯塑造了一些为了自己的社会和金钱利益而隐喻性阅读文本和人的人物:文学人。通过Arthur Clennam在《小多里特》中的思辨凝视,Silas Wegg在《我们共同的朋友》中的无实体腿,以及Pickwick在《Pickwick Papers》中对一块非常漂亮的岩石的发现,本文认为,这些文本中对思辨的批判创造了一种唯物主义的阅读伦理——一种将表面置于解释之上的阅读伦理。
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
Dickens Studies Annual
Dickens Studies Annual LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES-
自引率
87.50%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Interview with Michael Hollington, the Anti-Specialist The Queer Lives of Victorian Feminist Criticism Figuring Tough Subjects: Vague Labor and Narratorial Detection in Bleak House Noncanonical Victorian Women Novelists in the Twenty-First Century: Reconsidering Recovery Work Recent Dickens Studies 2021
×
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