Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture最新文献

英文中文

Therapeutic laughter in Robert Burton’s The Anatomy of Melancholy 罗伯特·伯顿的《忧郁剖析》中治疗性的笑声

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 2021-04-27 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00008

Cassie M. Miura

引用次数: 0

Solidarity as ritual in the late Elizabethan court 团结是伊丽莎白晚期宫廷的仪式

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 2021-04-27 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00014

Bradley J. Irish

引用次数: 0

Pleasure and the ‘rustic life’ 快乐与“乡村生活”

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00010

引用次数: 0

Happy Hamlet 快乐的哈姆雷特

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00007

引用次数: 0

Front matter 前页

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00001

引用次数: 0

The theology of cheer, Erasmus to Shakespeare 欢乐神学，伊拉斯谟之于莎士比亚

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00012

引用次数: 0

Merriness, affect, and community in Shakespeare’s Merry Wives of Windsor 莎士比亚《温莎的风流娘儿们》中的欢乐、情感和群体

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00015

引用次数: 0

Afterword 后记

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00021

N. Bekhta, Gero Guttzeit

The contributions to this special issue suggested insightful interpretations of various 19-century monsters in Anglophone fiction from the vantage point of 21-century readers. Taken together, these insights amount to a practice of monstrous reading: in Jeffrey Jerome Cohen's (1996) sense, this is a method of analysing a specific historical point in Anglophone culture through the monsters it created. Yet it also means rereading well-known monsters themselves – a re-reading which creates the antinomy (a paradoxical and hence, in some sense, monstrous construction) of simultaneously affirming their horrifying status and denying their monstrosity, it being a mere prejudice or convention. This paradoxical impasse – that "[o]ne cannot say: 'here are our monsters,' without immediately turning the monsters into pets" (Derrida 1990, 80) – led Derrida to argue that "the future is necessarily monstrous: [...] A future that would not be monstrous would not be a future; it would already be a predictable, calculable, and programmable tomorrow" (Derrida 1995, 386-387). In our current age of monsters, characterized by the dual processes of the monstering of humanity and the humanising of the monstrous, Fred Botting rightly poses the question: "When monsters are no longer monstrous, no longer surprising or unpredictable, what of the future?" (Botting 2003, 361). In light of the readings of the monster's 19-century past, this afterword poses the question of its methodological future. Positioning ourselves within the ongoing debate on reading practices within literary studies, described by Rita Felski as "the method wars" (2014, v), we attempt to distil from monster theory the practice of monstrous reading and highlight some of its implications for literary and cultural studies. Viewed from afar, it is clear that even the current state of theory itself might be treated as monstrous (Guttzeit 2018a, 551). Theory 'after theory' (Eagleton 2004) oscillates between life and death, just like our era's most popular transgressor, the zombie. What is more, both the spectral and the posthuman turns have made pressing the question of monstering and humanising reading(s). The cyborg (Haraway 1991) and the ghost (Derrida 2006) are emblematic of these developments, and both – like other monsters – have been used to suggest characteristics of reading practices. In an analysis of Shelley Jackson's Patchwork Girl (1995) – her seminal hypertext appropriation of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein – N. Katherine Hayles argues that "electronic hypertexts initiate and demand cyborg reading practices" which, while specific for the medium, "may also be evoked through the content of print texts" (Hayles 2000, n.p.). Hayles' insistence on the role of the reader being "spliced into an integrated circuit with one or more intelligent machines" needs to be extended with regard to current critical and popular reading practices in the context of what has been called "the Age of Amazon" (McGurl 2016). In

本期特刊的投稿从21世纪读者的角度对英语小说中各种19世纪的怪物进行了深刻的解读。综上所述，这些见解相当于一种“怪物阅读”的实践:在杰弗里·杰罗姆·科恩(Jeffrey Jerome Cohen, 1996)看来，这是一种通过它所创造的怪物来分析英语文化中特定历史点的方法。然而，这也意味着重新阅读众所周知的怪物本身——这种重新阅读创造了一种矛盾(一种矛盾的，因此在某种意义上，是一种怪物的结构)，同时肯定了它们的可怕地位，否认了它们的怪物性，这仅仅是一种偏见或习俗。这种矛盾的僵局——“我们不能说:‘这是我们的怪物’，而不立即把怪物变成宠物”(德里达1990,80)——导致德里达认为“未来必然是怪物:[…]一个不可怕的未来就不是一个未来;它已经是一个可预测的、可计算的、可编程的明天”(德里达1995,386 -387)。在我们这个怪物横行的时代，人类的怪物化和怪物的人性化的双重过程是其特征，弗雷德·博廷正确地提出了这样一个问题:“当怪物不再是怪物，不再令人惊讶或不可预测的时候，未来会怎样?”(Botting 2003, 361)。根据对19世纪怪物过去的解读，这篇后记提出了其方法论未来的问题。我们将自己置身于文学研究中关于阅读实践的持续辩论中，丽塔·费尔斯基(Rita Felski)将其描述为“方法战争”(2014,v)，我们试图从怪物理论中提炼出怪物阅读的实践，并强调其对文学和文化研究的一些影响。从远处看，很明显，即使是理论本身的现状也可能被视为可怕的(Guttzeit 2018a, 551)。一个又一个理论(Eagleton 2004)在生与死之间摇摆，就像我们这个时代最受欢迎的罪犯——僵尸一样。更重要的是，幽灵和后人类的转变都使怪物阅读和人性化阅读的问题变得紧迫起来。半机械人(Haraway, 1991)和幽灵(Derrida, 2006)是这些发展的象征，两者——像其他怪物一样——都被用来暗示阅读练习的特征。在对雪莱·杰克逊的《拼凑女孩》(1995)的分析中——她对玛丽·雪莱的《弗兰肯斯坦》的开创性超文本挪用——n·凯瑟琳·海尔斯认为，“电子超文本启动并要求电子人的阅读实践”，而这种实践虽然是针对媒介的，“也可能通过印刷文本的内容被唤起”(海尔斯2000年，n.p)。海尔斯坚持认为，读者的角色是“与一台或多台智能机器拼接成集成电路”，这一观点需要在被称为“亚马逊时代”的背景下，延伸到当前的批判性和流行阅读实践中。引用另一个怪物，西比勒·鲍姆巴赫(Sibylle Baumbach)将美杜莎(medusamorphosis)的概念作为读者迷恋的决定性因素(2015,2)。在戏剧研究领域，安德鲁·索弗(Andrew Sofer)采用了德里安理论，

{"title":"Afterword","authors":"N. Bekhta, Gero Guttzeit","doi":"10.7765/9781526137142.00021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526137142.00021","url":null,"abstract":"The contributions to this special issue suggested insightful interpretations of various 19-century monsters in Anglophone fiction from the vantage point of 21-century readers. Taken together, these insights amount to a practice of monstrous reading: in Jeffrey Jerome Cohen's (1996) sense, this is a method of analysing a specific historical point in Anglophone culture through the monsters it created. Yet it also means rereading well-known monsters themselves – a re-reading which creates the antinomy (a paradoxical and hence, in some sense, monstrous construction) of simultaneously affirming their horrifying status and denying their monstrosity, it being a mere prejudice or convention. This paradoxical impasse – that \"[o]ne cannot say: 'here are our monsters,' without immediately turning the monsters into pets\" (Derrida 1990, 80) – led Derrida to argue that \"the future is necessarily monstrous: [...] A future that would not be monstrous would not be a future; it would already be a predictable, calculable, and programmable tomorrow\" (Derrida 1995, 386-387). In our current age of monsters, characterized by the dual processes of the monstering of humanity and the humanising of the monstrous, Fred Botting rightly poses the question: \"When monsters are no longer monstrous, no longer surprising or unpredictable, what of the future?\" (Botting 2003, 361). In light of the readings of the monster's 19-century past, this afterword poses the question of its methodological future. Positioning ourselves within the ongoing debate on reading practices within literary studies, described by Rita Felski as \"the method wars\" (2014, v), we attempt to distil from monster theory the practice of monstrous reading and highlight some of its implications for literary and cultural studies. Viewed from afar, it is clear that even the current state of theory itself might be treated as monstrous (Guttzeit 2018a, 551). Theory 'after theory' (Eagleton 2004) oscillates between life and death, just like our era's most popular transgressor, the zombie. What is more, both the spectral and the posthuman turns have made pressing the question of monstering and humanising reading(s). The cyborg (Haraway 1991) and the ghost (Derrida 2006) are emblematic of these developments, and both – like other monsters – have been used to suggest characteristics of reading practices. In an analysis of Shelley Jackson's Patchwork Girl (1995) – her seminal hypertext appropriation of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein – N. Katherine Hayles argues that \"electronic hypertexts initiate and demand cyborg reading practices\" which, while specific for the medium, \"may also be evoked through the content of print texts\" (Hayles 2000, n.p.). Hayles' insistence on the role of the reader being \"spliced into an integrated circuit with one or more intelligent machines\" needs to be extended with regard to current critical and popular reading practices in the context of what has been called \"the Age of Amazon\" (McGurl 2016). In","PeriodicalId":144058,"journal":{"name":"Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126042541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

‘My crown is called content’ “我的王冠叫做满足”

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00013

引用次数: 0

‘My heart is satisfied’ “我的心很满足。”

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.7765/9781526137142.00019

引用次数: 0

下一页尾页

类型

全部化学•材料生命科学医学物理工程技术环境•农林材料科学地球科学法学管理学化学环境科学与生态学计算机科学教育学经济学农林科学人文科学生物学数学物理与天体物理心理学综合性期刊其他工业工程理学历史学农学文学信息工程

数据库

全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley

期刊

Positive emotions in early modern literature and culture

全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.

﹀