Pub Date : 2013-07-23DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00101004
D. Raveh
The paper offers a philosophical reflection upon the film Ghajini which was directed by Ajith Rahul Murugadoss in 2008. The film is an Indian remake/translation/transcreation of Christopher Nolan’s Memento (2000). Through Ghajini, I attempt to explore the reversible migration between spaces such as forgetfulness and memory, moment and sequence, inwardness (or consciousness) and externality (or the world). The paper creates an intercultural dialogue about self-identity and the materials of which it is made, a theme touched upon and developed in both movies, Ghajini and Memento, each in their own way. Special attention is given to the activity of translation, with its possibilities and impossibilities, as the breeding-ground of every dialogic encounter. In my philosophical collage I draw on classical texts such as Patañjali’s Yogasūtra as well as modern interpretations such as Luce Irigaray’s Entre Orient et Occident.
本文对2008年由Ajith Rahul Murugadoss执导的电影Ghajini进行了哲学反思。这部电影是克里斯托弗·诺兰的《记忆碎片》(2000)的印度翻拍/翻译/再创作。通过Ghajini，我试图探索遗忘与记忆、时刻与序列、内在性(或意识)与外在性(或世界)等空间之间的可逆迁移。这篇论文创造了一种关于自我认同及其制作材料的跨文化对话，这是两部电影《Ghajini》和《Memento》都以各自的方式触及和发展的主题。特别注意的是翻译活动，它的可能性和不可能性，作为每一个对话相遇的孕育地。在我的哲学拼贴中，我借鉴了古典文本，如Patañjali的Yogasūtra，以及现代解释，如Luce Irigaray的Entre Orient et ocident。
{"title":"Translating Across Cultures:","authors":"D. Raveh","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00101004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00101004","url":null,"abstract":"The paper offers a philosophical reflection upon the film Ghajini which was directed by Ajith Rahul Murugadoss in 2008. The film is an Indian remake/translation/transcreation of Christopher Nolan’s Memento (2000). Through Ghajini, I attempt to explore the reversible migration between spaces such as forgetfulness and memory, moment and sequence, inwardness (or consciousness) and externality (or the world). The paper creates an intercultural dialogue about self-identity and the materials of which it is made, a theme touched upon and developed in both movies, Ghajini and Memento, each in their own way. Special attention is given to the activity of translation, with its possibilities and impossibilities, as the breeding-ground of every dialogic encounter. In my philosophical collage I draw on classical texts such as Patañjali’s Yogasūtra as well as modern interpretations such as Luce Irigaray’s Entre Orient et Occident.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130152563","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}
Pub Date : 2013-03-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00301010
S. Hawthorne
In this essay I examine Julia Kristeva’s transgressive body of work as a strategic embodiment of, and argument for, an ethical orientation towards otherness predicated on the image of divided subjectivity identified by Jacques Lacan but powerfully re-theorised as dialogic by Kristeva. I focus on what is, for Kristeva, a stylistically unique essay – “Stabat Mater” – which examines a number of institutional discourses about motherhood from the western philosophical, religious, and psychoanalytical traditions, and simultaneously subverts them with a parallel discourse (and enactment) ostensibly by an actual mother. The text itself, I argue, can be read as a performance of dialogic subjectivity and of Kristeva’s conception of maternality, which implies a radical ethical imperative – termed “herethics” – towards alterity. I propose that this herethical model might heuristically inform current debates regarding the ethical orientations of the study of religions as an academic field.
{"title":"An Outlaw Ethics for the Study of Religions: Maternality and the Dialogic Subject in Julia Kristeva’s “Stabat Mater”","authors":"S. Hawthorne","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00301010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00301010","url":null,"abstract":"In this essay I examine Julia Kristeva’s transgressive body of work as a strategic embodiment of, and argument for, an ethical orientation towards otherness predicated on the image of divided subjectivity identified by Jacques Lacan but powerfully re-theorised as dialogic by Kristeva. I focus on what is, for Kristeva, a stylistically unique essay – “Stabat Mater” – which examines a number of institutional discourses about motherhood from the western philosophical, religious, and psychoanalytical traditions, and simultaneously subverts them with a parallel discourse (and enactment) ostensibly by an actual mother. The text itself, I argue, can be read as a performance of dialogic subjectivity and of Kristeva’s conception of maternality, which implies a radical ethical imperative – termed “herethics” – towards alterity. I propose that this herethical model might heuristically inform current debates regarding the ethical orientations of the study of religions as an academic field.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114999804","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}
Arguments for the preservation of culture are based on an extremely problematic essentialist conception of culture as a fixed entity. The inadequacy of the essentialist conception has received increasing recognition, but an adequate positive conception has yet to take its place. This essay reframes the debate about cultural preservation by proposing a new conception of culture as conversation. The new conception acknowledges the fluidity and internal contestation that occurs within actual cultures, and the agency of a culture’s members in creating, transmitting and revising that culture. We make this new conception our basis for proposing that a proper concern for the value of a culture should be realized in enabling its members to sustain it, not to preserve some pre-existing essence. Adopting this more viable notion of culture also changes our conception of what needs to be done to sustain it, and allows us to acknowledge and better deal with the complex arguments for and against sustaining culture.
{"title":"Sustaining Cultures in the Face of Globalization","authors":"Nicole Hassoun, D. B. Wong","doi":"10.6155/CD2012.0202.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.6155/CD2012.0202.05","url":null,"abstract":"Arguments for the preservation of culture are based on an extremely problematic essentialist conception of culture as a fixed entity. The inadequacy of the essentialist conception has received increasing recognition, but an adequate positive conception has yet to take its place. This essay reframes the debate about cultural preservation by proposing a new conception of culture as conversation. The new conception acknowledges the fluidity and internal contestation that occurs within actual cultures, and the agency of a culture’s members in creating, transmitting and revising that culture. We make this new conception our basis for proposing that a proper concern for the value of a culture should be realized in enabling its members to sustain it, not to preserve some pre-existing essence. Adopting this more viable notion of culture also changes our conception of what needs to be done to sustain it, and allows us to acknowledge and better deal with the complex arguments for and against sustaining culture.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125836135","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}
This essay asks how we can explain why, in contrast with Western responses, a large number of Chinese citizens from all walks of life appear to have little sympathy with the spate of recent cases of dissidents having fallen foul of government regulations pertaining to public political criticism. The answer proposed in the essay is that there are cultural obstacles to the emergence of political dialogue in China beyond the well-canvassed official strictures on political critique. The essay addresses two of these obstacles under the headings of the Confucian meta-rule of obedience and normative nominalism, argued to be characteristic of traditional Chinese conceptions of language. The reasons why these two cultural features are able to contribute so effectively to the retardation of political dialogicity in China, this essay claims, are to be sought in their deep roots in Chinese thought and the political unconscious of China to this day.
{"title":"Cultural Obstacles to Political Dialogue in China","authors":"Yingchi Chu, H. Ruthrof","doi":"10.6155/CD2012.0202.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.6155/CD2012.0202.03","url":null,"abstract":"This essay asks how we can explain why, in contrast with Western responses, a large number of Chinese citizens from all walks of life appear to have little sympathy with the spate of recent cases of dissidents having fallen foul of government regulations pertaining to public political criticism. The answer proposed in the essay is that there are cultural obstacles to the emergence of political dialogue in China beyond the well-canvassed official strictures on political critique. The essay addresses two of these obstacles under the headings of the Confucian meta-rule of obedience and normative nominalism, argued to be characteristic of traditional Chinese conceptions of language. The reasons why these two cultural features are able to contribute so effectively to the retardation of political dialogicity in China, this essay claims, are to be sought in their deep roots in Chinese thought and the political unconscious of China to this day.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126323484","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}
Pub Date : 2012-03-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00201005
Erkki Huovinen
This essay develops an account of artistic creativity based on Martin Buber’s theory of dialogue. Crucially, Buber distinguishes between the It that is objectified in experience and use and the You whom we meet as a whole person in dialogical relationships. Buber’s emphasis on dialogue as the core of what it means to be human suggests that the human significance of art might also be in its dialogical potential. The problem, however, is that artists, psychologists, critics, and philosophers often treat artistic creativity in objective terms and thus make any dialogical ontology of art implausible. To address this issue, the essay proposes a dialogical anthropology of art that acknowledges the objective conditions of art-making and locates the human significance of art in the non-objective interfaces it opens between the artist and his or her world. Such an account brings to light the ways in which art may invite people into “unfinalizable” dialogical relationships with the world they inhabit.
{"title":"Dialogical Anthropology of Art","authors":"Erkki Huovinen","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00201005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00201005","url":null,"abstract":"This essay develops an account of artistic creativity based on Martin Buber’s theory of dialogue. Crucially, Buber distinguishes between the It that is objectified in experience and use and the You whom we meet as a whole person in dialogical relationships. Buber’s emphasis on dialogue as the core of what it means to be human suggests that the human significance of art might also be in its dialogical potential.\u0000The problem, however, is that artists, psychologists, critics, and philosophers often treat artistic creativity in objective terms and thus make any dialogical ontology of art implausible. To address this issue, the essay proposes a dialogical anthropology of art that acknowledges the objective conditions of art-making and locates the human significance of art in the non-objective interfaces it opens between the artist and his or her world. Such an account brings to light the ways in which art may invite people into “unfinalizable” dialogical relationships with the world they inhabit.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"26 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"113976423","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}
Pub Date : 2012-01-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00201006
G. Patella
What is the relevance of organizing knowledge in distinct conceptual fields when everything has become cultural with no distinct areas anymore? Is, for example, Western traditional aesthetics as an autonomous cognitive discipline always relevant in the age of multiculturalism? This essay argues, albeit controversially, that the perspective of socalled cultural studies has opened new doors by adopting a more radically pluralistic and inclusive approach – one whereby aesthetic categories are thought in terms of cultural practices. Despite the many defects of such culture-related studies – such as their eclecticism, lack of scientific rigor, or methodological unreliability – the challenges of today’s multicultural society demand that we pay more attention at all levels to the roles played by difference and dialogue with otherness. This includes overcoming any form of ethnocentricity in our cognitive cultural disciplines; incorporating new topical horizons, whether economic, political or social; and rethinking the very nature of value, meaning and way of life.
{"title":"Aesthetics, Culture, Dialogue","authors":"G. Patella","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00201006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00201006","url":null,"abstract":"What is the relevance of organizing knowledge in distinct conceptual fields when everything has become cultural with no distinct areas anymore? Is, for example, Western traditional aesthetics as an autonomous cognitive discipline always relevant in the age of multiculturalism? This essay argues, albeit controversially, that the perspective of socalled cultural studies has opened new doors by adopting a more radically pluralistic and inclusive approach – one whereby aesthetic categories are thought in terms of cultural practices. Despite the many defects of such culture-related studies – such as their eclecticism, lack of scientific rigor, or methodological unreliability – the challenges of today’s multicultural society demand that we pay more attention at all levels to the roles played by difference and dialogue with otherness. This includes overcoming any form of ethnocentricity in our cognitive cultural disciplines; incorporating new topical horizons, whether economic, political or social; and rethinking the very nature of value, meaning and way of life.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122292613","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}
Pub Date : 2011-09-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00102001
H. Köchler
The essay analyses the hermeneutics of civilizational dialogue and identifies four basic principles, or requirements: recognition of the equality of the “lifeworlds;” awareness of the “dialectics” of cultural self-comprehension; acknowledgement of formal “metanorms” such as the principle of mutuality; and transcending the circle of “civilizational self-affirmation.” On the basis of these criteria, the essay investigates how politics will have to be reshaped – domestically, regionally and globally – to enable a genuine dialogue of cultures and civilizations that can also serve as a cornerstone of peaceful coexistence among states. Addressing today’s multicultural reality and its impact on the traditional nation-state, the essay underlines the importance of intercultural openness and “civilizational curiosity” – instead of “civilizational nostalgia” – and suggests a redefinition of “co-existence” in the sense of active mutual engagement. The paper further undertakes a critical assessment of the role of “dialogue” as a fashionable decorum of international politics and questions the instrumentalization of the civilizational paradigm in the context of international politics.
{"title":"The Philosophy and Politics of Dialogue","authors":"H. Köchler","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00102001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00102001","url":null,"abstract":"The essay analyses the hermeneutics of civilizational dialogue and identifies four basic principles, or requirements: recognition of the equality of the “lifeworlds;” awareness of the “dialectics” of cultural self-comprehension; acknowledgement of formal “metanorms” such as the principle of mutuality; and transcending the circle of “civilizational self-affirmation.” On the basis of these criteria, the essay investigates how politics will have to be reshaped – domestically, regionally and globally – to enable a genuine dialogue of cultures and civilizations that can also serve as a cornerstone of peaceful coexistence among states. Addressing today’s multicultural reality and its impact on the traditional nation-state, the essay underlines the importance of intercultural openness and “civilizational curiosity” – instead of “civilizational nostalgia” – and suggests a redefinition of “co-existence” in the sense of active mutual engagement. The paper further undertakes a critical assessment of the role of “dialogue” as a fashionable decorum of international politics and questions the instrumentalization of the civilizational paradigm in the context of international politics.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125703542","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}
Pub Date : 2011-09-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00102003
P. Atterton
This essay addresses the question of what it means to be an American today. In the first half, I respond to Samuel P. Huntington’s claim that America’s national identity is fundamentally Anglo-Protestant by rehearsing Jacques Derrida’s argument that the founding of a nation whose self-understanding is based on the idea of a social contract, such as the United States, implies an “originating violence” governed by extralegal considerations. In the second half, I discuss the “melting pot” and “salad bowl” concepts of American identity and show how deconstruction does not force us to choose between them. However, I suggest that the dynamic nature of the melting pot is more consonant with the deconstructionist idea of the American people “to come” presented in the first half.
{"title":"What It Means to Be an American Today: Democracy “To Come”","authors":"P. Atterton","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00102003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00102003","url":null,"abstract":"This essay addresses the question of what it means to be an American today. In the first half, I respond to Samuel P. Huntington’s claim that America’s national identity is fundamentally Anglo-Protestant by rehearsing Jacques Derrida’s argument that the founding of a nation whose self-understanding is based on the idea of a social contract, such as the United States, implies an “originating violence” governed by extralegal considerations. In the second half, I discuss the “melting pot” and “salad bowl” concepts of American identity and show how deconstruction does not force us to choose between them. However, I suggest that the dynamic nature of the melting pot is more consonant with the deconstructionist idea of the American people “to come” presented in the first half.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127852123","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}
Pub Date : 2011-07-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00102006
Madhucchanda Sen
This essay attempts to show how a particular view of the self and the mind has ignored its Other-related, world-related and thus embodied character. This view, whose origins in the history of ideas can be traced back to René Descartes, has led to important theories of mind and language. It has also generated a certain hegemony of binaries, such as the inner and the outer, the mind and the world, the self and the other, the subjective and the objective, or the intrinsic and the extrinsic. This picture of the self and the mind thus portrayed as epistemologically insulated entities has begotten serious problems in the philosophies of mind and language as well as in the cognitive sciences. It is a view that has pervaded many recent developments in these fields and bears the name of Representationalism. The essay therefore starts with a critique of the Cartesian conception of the mind and the ensuing inner/outer or self/other dualities that it creates, then turns to Representationalism as found in the analytical philosophical tradition.
{"title":"The Self and the Other, The Inner and the Outer:","authors":"Madhucchanda Sen","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00102006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00102006","url":null,"abstract":"This essay attempts to show how a particular view of the self and the mind has ignored its Other-related, world-related and thus embodied character. This view, whose origins in the history of ideas can be traced back to René Descartes, has led to important theories of mind and language. It has also generated a certain hegemony of binaries, such as the inner and the outer, the mind and the world, the self and the other, the subjective and the objective, or the intrinsic and the extrinsic. This picture of the self and the mind thus portrayed as epistemologically insulated entities has begotten serious problems in the philosophies of mind and language as well as in the cognitive sciences. It is a view that has pervaded many recent developments in these fields and bears the name of Representationalism.\u0000The essay therefore starts with a critique of the Cartesian conception of the mind and the ensuing inner/outer or self/other dualities that it creates, then turns to Representationalism as found in the analytical philosophical tradition.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"388 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123196723","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}
Pub Date : 2011-05-01DOI: 10.1163/24683949-00101005
Kinya Nishi
In The Death of Tragedy (1961) George Steiner observed that tragedy as a form of drama was “distinctive of Western tradition.” Today, critics and scholars are understandably impatient with this position. Indeed, Andrew Gerstle points to Japanese traditional theater to challenge the idea that there can only be one norm of the concept of the tragic. Yet both Steiner and Gerstle absolutize formalistically the power of tragic art to reveal an unalterable human condition, thereby disconnecting great literary achievements from the perception of contemporary society. The argument of this essay is inspired by Raymond William’s notion of “modern tragedy,” which considers tragedy as a representation of our experience of the permanent contradictions in the process of modernization. From this perspective I critically examine the reception of traditional and modern Japanese literature in an attempt to establish through multicultural dialogue a truly inclusive framework for the interpretation of tragic art.
{"title":"A Multicultural Approach to the Idea of Tragedy","authors":"Kinya Nishi","doi":"10.1163/24683949-00101005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683949-00101005","url":null,"abstract":"In The Death of Tragedy (1961) George Steiner observed that tragedy as a form of drama was “distinctive of Western tradition.” Today, critics and scholars are understandably impatient with this position. Indeed, Andrew Gerstle points to Japanese traditional theater to challenge the idea that there can only be one norm of the concept of the tragic. Yet both Steiner and Gerstle absolutize formalistically the power of tragic art to reveal an unalterable human condition, thereby disconnecting great literary achievements from the perception of contemporary society. The argument of this essay is inspired by Raymond William’s notion of “modern tragedy,” which considers tragedy as a representation of our experience of the permanent contradictions in the process of modernization. From this perspective I critically examine the reception of traditional and modern Japanese literature in an attempt to establish through multicultural dialogue a truly inclusive framework for the interpretation of tragic art.","PeriodicalId":160891,"journal":{"name":"Culture and Dialogue","volume":"521 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123442195","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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：