The Ethos of Distance in Emotional Culture Critiques: Helmuth Plessner, Richard Sennett, Frank Furedi

IF 0.4 3区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1215/0094033x-10460010
M. Kolkenbrock
{"title":"The Ethos of Distance in Emotional Culture Critiques: Helmuth Plessner, Richard Sennett, Frank Furedi","authors":"M. Kolkenbrock","doi":"10.1215/0094033x-10460010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although COVID-19 gave “social distancing” an omnipresent urgency, the concept of distance—in its spatial meaning and in its metaphorical use for emotional detachment, interpersonal boundaries, and socially constructed difference—has been central to theories, practices, and ethics of modern sociability. This article argues that the sociological critique of modern therapeutic culture deploys a specific ethos of distance, which is shown through the work of Richard Sennett and Frank Furedi. Sennett and Furedi reactualize intellectual debates around the regulation of emotional exposure and vulnerability reminiscent of the “codes of cool conduct” in the culture of Weimar Germany, which Helmut Lethen has famously conceptualized based on the philosophical anthropology of Helmuth Plessner. Drawing on Sara Ahmed’s work, the article argues that this Plessnerian ethos of distance, while ostensibly designed to guarantee just and pluralistic societies, reproduces social hierarchies of political emotions and in this way prioritizes the stability of the current system and social cohesion over justice.","PeriodicalId":46595,"journal":{"name":"NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/0094033x-10460010","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although COVID-19 gave “social distancing” an omnipresent urgency, the concept of distance—in its spatial meaning and in its metaphorical use for emotional detachment, interpersonal boundaries, and socially constructed difference—has been central to theories, practices, and ethics of modern sociability. This article argues that the sociological critique of modern therapeutic culture deploys a specific ethos of distance, which is shown through the work of Richard Sennett and Frank Furedi. Sennett and Furedi reactualize intellectual debates around the regulation of emotional exposure and vulnerability reminiscent of the “codes of cool conduct” in the culture of Weimar Germany, which Helmut Lethen has famously conceptualized based on the philosophical anthropology of Helmuth Plessner. Drawing on Sara Ahmed’s work, the article argues that this Plessnerian ethos of distance, while ostensibly designed to guarantee just and pluralistic societies, reproduces social hierarchies of political emotions and in this way prioritizes the stability of the current system and social cohesion over justice.
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
情感文化批评中的距离伦理:赫尔穆特·普莱斯纳、理查德·森内特、弗兰克·福雷迪
尽管2019冠状病毒病给“社会距离”带来了无处不在的紧迫性,但距离的概念——就其空间意义以及对情感超脱、人际界限和社会建构差异的隐喻用途而言——一直是现代社交的理论、实践和伦理的核心。本文认为,对现代治疗文化的社会学批判运用了一种特殊的距离感,这种距离感通过理查德·森内特和弗兰克·福瑞迪的作品得以体现。Sennett和Furedi重新实现了围绕情绪暴露和脆弱性调节的智力辩论,这让人想起德国魏玛文化中的“酷行为准则”,Helmut Lethen根据Helmuth Plessner的哲学人类学将其概念化。本文借鉴Sara Ahmed的著作,认为普莱斯纳式的距离感虽然表面上是为了保证社会的公正和多元化,但实际上再现了政治情感的社会等级,并以此将当前制度的稳定性和社会凝聚力置于正义之上。
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
NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE
NEW GERMAN CRITIQUE LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Widely considered the top journal in its field, New German Critique is an interdisciplinary journal that focuses on twentieth- and twenty-first-century German studies and publishes on a wide array of subjects, including literature, film, and media; literary theory and cultural studies; Holocaust studies; art and architecture; political and social theory; and philosophy. Established in the early 1970s, the journal has played a significant role in introducing U.S. readers to Frankfurt School thinkers and remains an important forum for debate in the humanities.
期刊最新文献
Queer Spectrality and the Hope of Heterolingual Address The Sociability of Narrative: Freedom, Vulnerability, and Mediation in the Intercultural Novel Coming to Terms with the Future Undisciplined Knowledge: Intersectional Black European Studies Where Next for New German Critique?
×
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