An auxiliar light Came from my mind, which on the setting sun Bestowed new splendour. William Wordsworth (1) THIS PAPER IS PREPARATORY TO A READING OF THE ODE. It tries to clarify the two principal ideas, or forms of experience, that Wordsworth believed made the Ode intelligible--the idea of immortality, and the relation of that idea to certain recollections of early childhood. The incomprehension and ridicule with which the Ode was first read moderated into a perception of its failure to reveal any recognizable form of immortality. How Wordsworth understood that term forms the first part of this paper, and attempts to reinstate his more complex insights, which later readings buried beneath simpler notions of physical resurrection and survival of the self. Unless we can look beyond those conventional ideas of immortality we will tend to ask the wrong questions of the poem, fail to see what Wordsworth was getting at, and so assert, mistakenly, I believe, that he could not substantiate his later subtitle, nor resolve the problems the poem raises. The second part considers what one reader called "the very mysterious and idiosyncratic experiences that lie at the heart of the poem," the remembered glories of childhood. But as the same reader adds, the difficulty is that although he "tries to do this with great precision and scrupulousness, both of argument and vocabulary... his articulation is ultimately unfathomable, because what he's attempting to express lies beyond the scope of words." (2) Eliot, in describing his own poetry as "a raid on the inarticulate / With shabby equipment always deteriorating / In the general mess of imprecision of feeling," (3) unwittingly typified the struggle Wordsworth himself acknowledged in such phrases as the "sad incompetence of human speech," and in the need to "make / Breathings for incommunicable powers" (1850 6.593; 1805.3.187-88). Both poets believe that the attempt to articulate the inarticulate is at the center of their work. That persistence suggests they believe that words can be used to convey what they cannot express precisely. Are critics not bound, therefore, in some way or other, to follow these "raids," to tie them together, to set them in a context that may render them a little more fathomable? Wordsworth is a poet particularly open to such a process, because he goes over similar ground in different ways, at different times, and in very different kinds of poems. If critical discourse abandons the attempt to follow him in this respect, then we may understand variously the political Wordsworth, or the elegiac Wordsworth, or the pastoral Wordsworth, and so on--in general the materialized Wordsworth--but not the kind of poet Wordsworth thought himself--the poet trying to apprehend experiences on the margins of conscious articulation, which he believed inform our being. And so we should avoid taking refuge in supposing Wordsworth's experience "unfathomable," or hiding behind the term "idiosyncratic." To p
{"title":"The Intelligible Ode","authors":"G. Davidson","doi":"10.2307/jj.1640544","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.1640544","url":null,"abstract":"An auxiliar light Came from my mind, which on the setting sun Bestowed new splendour. William Wordsworth (1) THIS PAPER IS PREPARATORY TO A READING OF THE ODE. It tries to clarify the two principal ideas, or forms of experience, that Wordsworth believed made the Ode intelligible--the idea of immortality, and the relation of that idea to certain recollections of early childhood. The incomprehension and ridicule with which the Ode was first read moderated into a perception of its failure to reveal any recognizable form of immortality. How Wordsworth understood that term forms the first part of this paper, and attempts to reinstate his more complex insights, which later readings buried beneath simpler notions of physical resurrection and survival of the self. Unless we can look beyond those conventional ideas of immortality we will tend to ask the wrong questions of the poem, fail to see what Wordsworth was getting at, and so assert, mistakenly, I believe, that he could not substantiate his later subtitle, nor resolve the problems the poem raises. The second part considers what one reader called \"the very mysterious and idiosyncratic experiences that lie at the heart of the poem,\" the remembered glories of childhood. But as the same reader adds, the difficulty is that although he \"tries to do this with great precision and scrupulousness, both of argument and vocabulary... his articulation is ultimately unfathomable, because what he's attempting to express lies beyond the scope of words.\" (2) Eliot, in describing his own poetry as \"a raid on the inarticulate / With shabby equipment always deteriorating / In the general mess of imprecision of feeling,\" (3) unwittingly typified the struggle Wordsworth himself acknowledged in such phrases as the \"sad incompetence of human speech,\" and in the need to \"make / Breathings for incommunicable powers\" (1850 6.593; 1805.3.187-88). Both poets believe that the attempt to articulate the inarticulate is at the center of their work. That persistence suggests they believe that words can be used to convey what they cannot express precisely. Are critics not bound, therefore, in some way or other, to follow these \"raids,\" to tie them together, to set them in a context that may render them a little more fathomable? Wordsworth is a poet particularly open to such a process, because he goes over similar ground in different ways, at different times, and in very different kinds of poems. If critical discourse abandons the attempt to follow him in this respect, then we may understand variously the political Wordsworth, or the elegiac Wordsworth, or the pastoral Wordsworth, and so on--in general the materialized Wordsworth--but not the kind of poet Wordsworth thought himself--the poet trying to apprehend experiences on the margins of conscious articulation, which he believed inform our being. And so we should avoid taking refuge in supposing Wordsworth's experience \"unfathomable,\" or hiding behind the term \"idiosyncratic.\" To p","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2017-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46564582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Desire in the Canterbury Tales by Elizabeth Scala. The Ohio State University Press, 2015. Elizabeth Scala's most recent monograph, Desire in the Canterbury Tales, reads Chaucer's Canterbury Tales as a discourse of desire. She argues that this discourse is not only rooted in the topics chosen by individual pilgrims in the frame narrative, but can also, more significantly, be found in various acts of misreading occurring in the frame narrative that produce compulsive desires and that can in turn be traced in the structure of the language and in signifying chains connecting the tales. The frame narrative, Scala argues, is where Chaucer sets up a "pretended unity" among the pilgrims, "a unity that then gets tested and discomfited" (2-4) and results in competitive fictions that are often linked to misrecognitions and misreadings of the tale tellers. Scala's work, as a whole, contributes a structural reading of the tales to ongoing debates in Chaucer studies. But her monograph also productively intervenes in current criticism by linking her structural analysis of Chaucer's language to the psychoanalytical theories of Jacques Lacan. Scala argues that the "conscious means by which speakers pursue various desires and goals" are linked to the "structure of unconscious desire assumed with language" (11). Psychoanalytic theories help her to explain "the subjects position within the complex and socially structured world of symbolization, the Symbolic order" (11). Scala's readings are therefore heavily influenced by Saussure's structural linguistics regarding the signifier in language (the '"audible image' of a sign"), which Lacanian theories separate from the mental concepts the signifier inspires. Lacans essay on the "Mirror Stage" is referenced more particularly to point to the "imaginary identifications and gestures of communication" which arise from mistaking other subjects as our "selves" (24). Her individual chapters trace these structural and psychoanalytical theories in the frame narratives and tales of Fragment I, as well as in the marriage group and the religious stories of the Canterbury Tales. Her analyses therefore also consider how desire might be linked to gender and sexuality, as well as to religion. She moreover frames her argument by considering other voices in Chaucer studies (including debates by New Critics and Historicists) and, more specifically, the questions these schools of thought leave unanswered about language, selfhood, and expressions of desires in medieval texts (15-20). Her introductory chapter, "Mobility and Contestation," describes her overarching argument for the book, and frames it by setting up her critical apparatus and her definition of Chaucer's discourse of desire. She begins her analysis of the primary source by quoting the first eighteen lines of the General Prologue and pointing to the "function of desire" in his poetry. Verbs like "longen" and "seken," framed by the "artifice" of nature ("rains, warming winds, and
{"title":"Desire in the Canterbury Tales","authors":"S. Mayrhofer","doi":"10.5860/choice.192227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.192227","url":null,"abstract":"Desire in the Canterbury Tales by Elizabeth Scala. The Ohio State University Press, 2015. Elizabeth Scala's most recent monograph, Desire in the Canterbury Tales, reads Chaucer's Canterbury Tales as a discourse of desire. She argues that this discourse is not only rooted in the topics chosen by individual pilgrims in the frame narrative, but can also, more significantly, be found in various acts of misreading occurring in the frame narrative that produce compulsive desires and that can in turn be traced in the structure of the language and in signifying chains connecting the tales. The frame narrative, Scala argues, is where Chaucer sets up a \"pretended unity\" among the pilgrims, \"a unity that then gets tested and discomfited\" (2-4) and results in competitive fictions that are often linked to misrecognitions and misreadings of the tale tellers. Scala's work, as a whole, contributes a structural reading of the tales to ongoing debates in Chaucer studies. But her monograph also productively intervenes in current criticism by linking her structural analysis of Chaucer's language to the psychoanalytical theories of Jacques Lacan. Scala argues that the \"conscious means by which speakers pursue various desires and goals\" are linked to the \"structure of unconscious desire assumed with language\" (11). Psychoanalytic theories help her to explain \"the subjects position within the complex and socially structured world of symbolization, the Symbolic order\" (11). Scala's readings are therefore heavily influenced by Saussure's structural linguistics regarding the signifier in language (the '\"audible image' of a sign\"), which Lacanian theories separate from the mental concepts the signifier inspires. Lacans essay on the \"Mirror Stage\" is referenced more particularly to point to the \"imaginary identifications and gestures of communication\" which arise from mistaking other subjects as our \"selves\" (24). Her individual chapters trace these structural and psychoanalytical theories in the frame narratives and tales of Fragment I, as well as in the marriage group and the religious stories of the Canterbury Tales. Her analyses therefore also consider how desire might be linked to gender and sexuality, as well as to religion. She moreover frames her argument by considering other voices in Chaucer studies (including debates by New Critics and Historicists) and, more specifically, the questions these schools of thought leave unanswered about language, selfhood, and expressions of desires in medieval texts (15-20). Her introductory chapter, \"Mobility and Contestation,\" describes her overarching argument for the book, and frames it by setting up her critical apparatus and her definition of Chaucer's discourse of desire. She begins her analysis of the primary source by quoting the first eighteen lines of the General Prologue and pointing to the \"function of desire\" in his poetry. Verbs like \"longen\" and \"seken,\" framed by the \"artifice\" of nature (\"rains, warming winds, and","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71028723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ellipsis in English Literature: Signs of Omission","authors":"A. Bricker","doi":"10.5860/choice.192164","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.192164","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71028678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Practice of Satire in England, 1658-1770 by Ashley Marshall. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013. Pp. xx + 430. As Ashley Marshall began her career with an impressive series of essays and is already well known in eighteenth-century studies, scholars in the field have eagerly anticipated her first book. In many respects, The Practice of Satire in England, 1658-1770 delivers what they have admired in her essays. It is well researched, ambitious, provocative, and generally sensible. Marshall sets out her whole vision of English satire for over 110 years after the Restoration of Charles II, making some challenging claims about how we should read satire during the period and indeed about literary historiography itself. Even if one does not always agree with her judgments, she presents a weighty and clearly articulated case that deserves serious consideration. It should be said at the outset that Marshall's scholarly methods are strongly marked by the influence of Robert D. Hume, her former supervisor and the dedicatee of this book. One might even say that Marshall attempts to do for satire what Hume did for drama in two important studies, The Development of English Drama in the Late Seventeenth Century (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976) and Henry Fielding and the London Theatre, 1728-1737 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988). In The Practice of Satire in England, there is the same wariness of existing literary categories and critical truisms, a similarly extensive range of primary texts, including many that have been neglected, and a parallel technique of reclassifying this broadened archive under new categories. If Hume gave us the distinction between "humane" and "reform" comedy, Marshall reorganizes satires into "modes" such as "Harsh Derogation," "Mockery and Ridicule," "Provocation of Thought," and "Exemplary Satire and Sympathy." Again emulating her eminent supervisor, Marshall makes an effort to position each work in its exact context in a particular decade or even year. She is highly impatient with scholars who generalize loosely about some "Augustan" era in which authors widely separated by time and immediate context, such as Dryden, Swift, and Pope, are treated as if they are all writing in the same year, with the same objectives, methods, and values. One believes Marshall when she says that, having read over 3000 satires, she could pin an unseen work to a particular decade or even half decade. This approach is fundamentally sensible: a few decades ago, at least, major scholars did routinely assume that a handful of canonical authors embodied the entire "Augustan" age, sharing not only a proclivity to satire but the same neoclassicism, high moral ideals, and commitment to social order. While Marshall dismantles these assumptions with great learning, however, one wonders how widely they are actually shared by eighteenth- century scholars in this particular decade. She claims that she is challenging a "myth of 'Augustan satire'" th
《英国的讽刺实践，1658-1770》作者:阿什利·马歇尔。巴尔的摩:约翰霍普金斯大学出版社，2013。Pp. xx + 430。由于阿什利·马歇尔以一系列令人印象深刻的论文开始了她的职业生涯，并且在18世纪的研究中已经广为人知，该领域的学者们热切期待着她的第一本书。在很多方面，《1658-1770年英国的讽刺实践》传达了他们在她的文章中所欣赏的东西。这本书研究充分，雄心勃勃，具有煽动性，而且总体上是明智的。马歇尔对查理二世复辟后的110多年里的英国讽刺文学进行了全面的阐述，对我们应该如何阅读这一时期的讽刺文学以及文学史学本身提出了一些具有挑战性的主张。即使人们并不总是同意她的判断，她也提出了一个值得认真考虑的重要而清晰的案例。一开始就应该说，马歇尔的学术方法深受她的前导师、本书的作者罗伯特·d·休谟的影响。有人甚至会说，马歇尔试图在讽刺文学上做休谟在两项重要研究中为戏剧所做的事情:《17世纪末英国戏剧的发展》(牛津:克拉伦登出版社，1976)和《亨利·菲尔丁与伦敦剧院，1728-1737》(牛津:克拉伦登出版社，1988)。在《英国的讽刺实践》中，对现有的文学类别和批判真理同样保持警惕，同样广泛的原始文本，包括许多被忽视的文本，以及将这些扩大的档案重新分类为新类别的平行技术。如果说休谟让我们区分了“人道”喜剧和“改革”喜剧，那么马歇尔则将讽刺作品重组为“模式”，如“严厉的贬损”、“嘲弄和嘲笑”、“思想的挑衅”和“模范的讽刺和同情”。马歇尔再次效仿她杰出的导师，努力将每一部作品置于特定十年甚至年份的确切背景中。她对一些学者对“奥古斯都”时代的随随便便的概括非常不耐烦。在这个时代，像德莱顿、斯威夫特和波普这样的作家，由于时间和上下文的不同而被广泛地分开，他们被认为是在同一年写作的，有着相同的目标、方法和价值观。马歇尔说，她读过3000多篇讽刺作品，她能把一部没见过的作品归类于某个特定的十年，甚至是五年。这种方法从根本上来说是合理的:至少在几十年前，主流学者确实经常假设少数正典作者代表了整个“奥古斯都”时代，他们不仅有讽刺的倾向，而且有同样的新古典主义、高尚的道德理想和对社会秩序的承诺。然而，尽管马歇尔以渊博的学识推翻了这些假设，人们还是想知道，在这个特殊的十年里，18世纪的学者们究竟有多少人认同这些假设。她声称，她正在挑战“半个世纪前由伊恩·杰克提出的‘奥古斯都讽刺’的神话”，这种神话“在很大程度上仍然占主导地位”(289)。然而，通过霍华德·d·温布罗特(Howard D. Weinbrot)等学者的努力，使用“奥古斯都”来描述1660年至1750年之间的时代已经变得如此罕见，以至于一些学者认为已经不存在了。例如，在2007年对温布罗特的两本书的评论文章中，小约翰·j·伯克(John J. Burke Jr.)宣称，“奥古斯都这个词已经从我们的词汇中消失了。”(“在新时代重新配置十八世纪文学观念:从奥古斯都到梅尼普”，《十八世纪生活》31:2[2007]:85)。这有点夸张。在同年出版的《布莱克威尔讽刺作品指南》(Malden: Blackwell, 2007)中，鲁本·金特罗(Rueben Quintero)撰写了一篇题为《教皇和奥古斯都诗歌讽刺》的文章，该文章普遍支持“奥古斯都”时代的旧观念，以及马歇尔抨击的另一类“涂鸦式讽刺”。她强烈否认波普、斯威夫特、盖伊，甚至更明显的是亨利·菲尔丁，可以被列为具有共同使命和态度的“潦草作家”，尽管他们偶尔会合作。…
{"title":"The Practice of Satire in England, 1658-1770","authors":"Nicholas Hudson","doi":"10.1353/book.23074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/book.23074","url":null,"abstract":"The Practice of Satire in England, 1658-1770 by Ashley Marshall. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013. Pp. xx + 430. As Ashley Marshall began her career with an impressive series of essays and is already well known in eighteenth-century studies, scholars in the field have eagerly anticipated her first book. In many respects, The Practice of Satire in England, 1658-1770 delivers what they have admired in her essays. It is well researched, ambitious, provocative, and generally sensible. Marshall sets out her whole vision of English satire for over 110 years after the Restoration of Charles II, making some challenging claims about how we should read satire during the period and indeed about literary historiography itself. Even if one does not always agree with her judgments, she presents a weighty and clearly articulated case that deserves serious consideration. It should be said at the outset that Marshall's scholarly methods are strongly marked by the influence of Robert D. Hume, her former supervisor and the dedicatee of this book. One might even say that Marshall attempts to do for satire what Hume did for drama in two important studies, The Development of English Drama in the Late Seventeenth Century (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976) and Henry Fielding and the London Theatre, 1728-1737 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988). In The Practice of Satire in England, there is the same wariness of existing literary categories and critical truisms, a similarly extensive range of primary texts, including many that have been neglected, and a parallel technique of reclassifying this broadened archive under new categories. If Hume gave us the distinction between \"humane\" and \"reform\" comedy, Marshall reorganizes satires into \"modes\" such as \"Harsh Derogation,\" \"Mockery and Ridicule,\" \"Provocation of Thought,\" and \"Exemplary Satire and Sympathy.\" Again emulating her eminent supervisor, Marshall makes an effort to position each work in its exact context in a particular decade or even year. She is highly impatient with scholars who generalize loosely about some \"Augustan\" era in which authors widely separated by time and immediate context, such as Dryden, Swift, and Pope, are treated as if they are all writing in the same year, with the same objectives, methods, and values. One believes Marshall when she says that, having read over 3000 satires, she could pin an unseen work to a particular decade or even half decade. This approach is fundamentally sensible: a few decades ago, at least, major scholars did routinely assume that a handful of canonical authors embodied the entire \"Augustan\" age, sharing not only a proclivity to satire but the same neoclassicism, high moral ideals, and commitment to social order. While Marshall dismantles these assumptions with great learning, however, one wonders how widely they are actually shared by eighteenth- century scholars in this particular decade. She claims that she is challenging a \"myth of 'Augustan satire'\" th","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2013-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66387979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Journey Westward: Joyce, "Dubliners" and the Literary Revival by Frank Shovlin. Liverpool U. Press, 2012. Pp. ix + 180. $99.95. James Joyce is inextricably linked with Dublin. Born and raised in the east-coast Irish metropolis and capital city, Joyce famously set all of his fictions there. The appearance of a monograph on Joyce and Western Ireland may therefore come as a surprise, yet such is precisely what Frank Shovlin, the author also of an excellent study on twentieth-century Irish literary periodicals, has written. The Gaelic-speaking west of Ireland is of course important to Joyce and other Irish authors as more than a geographical space; it connotes the essential, primitive, uncorrupted heart of Ireland--in Shovlin's words, the Revivalists' "Utopia" (3). Focusing on Joyce's Dubliners and, in particular, on that volume's closing masterpiece, "The Dead," Journey Westward: Joyce, Dubliners and the Literary Revival--steeped in Irish political and cultural history and possessing a keen eye and ear for linguistic detail and allusive nuance--makes the case for considering Joyce as a writer absorbed with "what lay beyond the Shannon, for rather more historically grounded, and sometimes more personal, reasons than those romantic, mythological considerations so close to Yeats's heart" (3). Journey Westward is divided into three long chapters, each of which "takes a different central theme or trope to help build towards a broader reconsideration of Joyce's attitude" to his homeland (3). Collectively, the three chapters explore Joyce's sense of estrangement from the "systems of power prevalent" in Ireland, in particular the British Empire, which "manifested itself in Joyce's Ireland via the Protestant ascendancy" (159-60). Chapter One treats the various "ways in which Joyce critiques Protestant power in Ireland via a subtle series of prompts towards distillation and the production of whisky" (3). To be sure, Dubliners is suffused with references to whisky and distilleries, the first of which appears early on in the collection's opening story, "The Sisters," and the last of which figures in the volume's closing masterpiece, "The Dead." Shovlin notes Joyce's familiarity with the well-known analogy between distillation and creative writing both involve a process of purifying and refining something (spirit or language) but argues that Joyce is far more interested in the "historical and biographical significance of whiskey" (15). Joyce's father, John, had a financial interest in and for a time was secretary of the Dublin and Chapelizod Distillery; when that distillery failed, John realized significant losses. Moreover, whiskey and its production in Ireland at the time "were associated with England, with the landlord caste and with imperial domination generally" (52). Given this view of whiskey, along with the "Joyce family's own misfortunes in the failed distillery at Chapelizod," Shovlin writes, "it is not surprising that Joyce blends the spirit into the
《西游:乔伊斯、“都柏林人”与文学复兴》弗兰克·肖夫林著。利物浦出版社，2012。Pp. ix + 180。99.95美元。詹姆斯·乔伊斯与都柏林有着千丝万缕的联系。乔伊斯出生并成长在爱尔兰东海岸的大都市和首都，他所有的小说都以那里为背景。一本关于乔伊斯和西爱尔兰的专著的出现可能会让人感到惊讶，但这正是Frank Shovlin所写的，他也对20世纪爱尔兰文学期刊进行了出色的研究。讲盖尔语的爱尔兰西部对乔伊斯和其他爱尔兰作家来说当然不仅仅是一个地理空间;它暗示着爱尔兰本质、原始、纯洁的心灵——用肖夫林的话来说，是文艺复兴派的“乌托邦”(Utopia)。聚焦于乔伊斯的《都柏林人》，尤其是该卷的结尾处杰作《死者》(the Dead)，西游:乔伊斯，都柏林人和文学复兴——沉浸在爱尔兰的政治和文化历史中，对语言细节和暗示的细微差别有着敏锐的眼睛和耳朵——使得乔伊斯被认为是一个作家，专注于“香农河之外的东西，比那些浪漫的，神话的考虑更有历史基础，有时更个人，更接近叶芝的心”(3)。每一章都“采用了不同的中心主题或修辞，以帮助更广泛地重新思考乔伊斯对他的祖国的态度”(3)。总的来说，这三章探讨了乔伊斯对爱尔兰“普遍存在的权力体系”的疏离感，特别是大英帝国，“通过新教的优势在乔伊斯的爱尔兰表现出来”(159-60)。第一章讨论了“乔伊斯通过一系列微妙的关于蒸馏和威士忌生产的提示来批判爱尔兰新教势力的各种方式”(3)。当然，《都柏林人》中充斥着对威士忌和酿酒厂的提及，其中第一个出现在这本书的开头故事《姐妹们》中，最后一个出现在这本书的结尾处杰作《死者》中。肖夫林指出，乔伊斯熟悉蒸馏和创造性写作之间众所周知的类比，两者都涉及净化和提炼某些东西(精神或语言)的过程，但他认为乔伊斯对“威士忌的历史和传记意义”更感兴趣(15)。乔伊斯的父亲约翰(John)在都柏林和查佩利佐德酿酒厂(Dublin and Chapelizod Distillery)有经济利益，曾担任过一段时间的秘书;酿酒厂倒闭后，约翰损失惨重。此外，当时爱尔兰的威士忌及其生产“与英格兰、地主种姓和帝国统治联系在一起”(52)。鉴于这种对威士忌的看法，再加上“乔伊斯家族在查佩利佐德(Chapelizod)酿酒厂失败的不幸，”肖夫林写道，“乔伊斯把这种酒混在都柏林酒中，作为一种一贯的负面预兆，也就不足为奇了”(52页)。第二章关注乔伊斯对“1691年爱尔兰詹姆斯派垮台所带来的地震般的历史转变”的关注(4)。肖夫林认为:“评论家和普通读者都忽略了乔伊斯对詹姆斯主义失败的兴趣。“未能认识到他作品中一贯的张力，导致了对乔伊斯对爱尔兰民族主义的态度以及他对爱尔兰历史和史学的参与的误解和误解”(63)。这一章的许多环环相扣的论点使读者敏感地注意到乔伊斯对失去的斯图尔特事业的兴趣，特别是当这种兴趣在《姐妹》、《赛跑之后》和《死者》中隐晦地表现出来时。肖夫林对乔伊斯在《亡者》中对大雁这一历史现象的诡秘处理的讨论尤其令人信服。第三章探讨乔伊斯“对文学复兴和爱尔兰悲剧[殖民]历史的态度”(4). ...
{"title":"Journey Westward: Joyce, \"Dubliners\" and the Literary Revival","authors":"B. Shaffer","doi":"10.5860/choice.50-2539","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.50-2539","url":null,"abstract":"Journey Westward: Joyce, \"Dubliners\" and the Literary Revival by Frank Shovlin. Liverpool U. Press, 2012. Pp. ix + 180. $99.95. James Joyce is inextricably linked with Dublin. Born and raised in the east-coast Irish metropolis and capital city, Joyce famously set all of his fictions there. The appearance of a monograph on Joyce and Western Ireland may therefore come as a surprise, yet such is precisely what Frank Shovlin, the author also of an excellent study on twentieth-century Irish literary periodicals, has written. The Gaelic-speaking west of Ireland is of course important to Joyce and other Irish authors as more than a geographical space; it connotes the essential, primitive, uncorrupted heart of Ireland--in Shovlin's words, the Revivalists' \"Utopia\" (3). Focusing on Joyce's Dubliners and, in particular, on that volume's closing masterpiece, \"The Dead,\" Journey Westward: Joyce, Dubliners and the Literary Revival--steeped in Irish political and cultural history and possessing a keen eye and ear for linguistic detail and allusive nuance--makes the case for considering Joyce as a writer absorbed with \"what lay beyond the Shannon, for rather more historically grounded, and sometimes more personal, reasons than those romantic, mythological considerations so close to Yeats's heart\" (3). Journey Westward is divided into three long chapters, each of which \"takes a different central theme or trope to help build towards a broader reconsideration of Joyce's attitude\" to his homeland (3). Collectively, the three chapters explore Joyce's sense of estrangement from the \"systems of power prevalent\" in Ireland, in particular the British Empire, which \"manifested itself in Joyce's Ireland via the Protestant ascendancy\" (159-60). Chapter One treats the various \"ways in which Joyce critiques Protestant power in Ireland via a subtle series of prompts towards distillation and the production of whisky\" (3). To be sure, Dubliners is suffused with references to whisky and distilleries, the first of which appears early on in the collection's opening story, \"The Sisters,\" and the last of which figures in the volume's closing masterpiece, \"The Dead.\" Shovlin notes Joyce's familiarity with the well-known analogy between distillation and creative writing both involve a process of purifying and refining something (spirit or language) but argues that Joyce is far more interested in the \"historical and biographical significance of whiskey\" (15). Joyce's father, John, had a financial interest in and for a time was secretary of the Dublin and Chapelizod Distillery; when that distillery failed, John realized significant losses. Moreover, whiskey and its production in Ireland at the time \"were associated with England, with the landlord caste and with imperial domination generally\" (52). Given this view of whiskey, along with the \"Joyce family's own misfortunes in the failed distillery at Chapelizod,\" Shovlin writes, \"it is not surprising that Joyce blends the spirit into the ","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2012-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71140518","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary edited by Deborah E. Barker and Kathryn McKee. Athens, GA: U. of Georgia Press, 2011. Pp. ix + 374. Paper $24.95. The University of Georgia's New Southern Studies series continues to put out books of strong interest to southernists with the publication of American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary. Edited by Deborah E. Barker and Kathryn McKee, this collection undertakes an "exploration of the ways in which the southern imaginary is constitutive of American cinema and of the ways in which the makers of movies ... have imagined the 'South' both to construct and to unsettle national narratives" (1). In view of Southern studies' long-standing interdisciplinary attention to the production and circulation of visual imagery and iconographies of southernness, a consideration of the South in film that approaches the topic through the lens of the New Southern Studies--that is, one that rejects exceptionalist and essentialist narratives and interpretations in favor of a more expansive, shifting, or even transnational "South"--is long overdue. Indeed, the last edited collection on the topic, The South in Film, edited by Warren G. French, appeared thirty years ago. The collection's title reflects the compelling framework for Southern film studies that Barker and McKee set out in the introduction: that, far from being a marginal or merely regional set of tropes and images, the "South" has been integral to the development of American filmmaking and the national narratives it constructs. Drawing on theories of film, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and postcolonialism, they define the concept of "the southern imaginary" as "an amorphous and sometimes conflicting collection of images, ideas, attitudes, practices, linguistic accents, histories, and fantasies about a shifting geographic region and time" (2). Barker and McKee, and their contributors, have no interest in deconstructing regional images in film in order to present a more "accurate" or, worse, more "authentic" South. Rather, they consistently argue that "never more so than today has the South failed to call forth a set of stable defining features" (2). Appropriately, then, the fourteen essays that follow reject easy definition and geographical pinpointing in order to evoke a panoply of unstable, even contradictory, Souths: at once biracial and multiethnic, backwards looking and future oriented, regional and national, local and global. American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary is remarkable for the range of genres and films it manages to cover in a single volume. The contributors--a wide-ranging group drawn from English, film studies, African American and Native American studies, and musicology--discuss over thirty films such as silents, big-budget productions, classics, indies, documentaries, prestige films, and less high-minded projects. These include iconic films that one would expect in such a collection--The Birth of a Nation, Gone with the Wind, O Brother,
《美国电影与南方想象》黛博拉·e·巴克和凯瑟琳·麦基主编。雅典，乔治亚州:乔治亚大学出版社，2011。第ix + 374页。论文24.95美元。佐治亚大学的“新南方研究”系列继续推出南方人感兴趣的书籍，其中包括《美国电影》和《南方想象》。由黛博拉·e·巴克和凯瑟琳·麦基编辑，这本合集“探索了南方的想象是如何构成美国电影的，以及电影制作人如何……(1)鉴于南方研究长期以来对视觉意象和南方形象的生产和流通的跨学科关注，电影中对南方的考虑通过新南方研究的镜头来处理这个话题——也就是说，拒绝例外主义和本质主义的叙事和解释，赞成更广泛的，不断变化的，甚至是跨国的“南方”——早就应该出现了。事实上，关于这一主题的最后一部合集《电影中的南方》(the South in Film)出版于30年前，作者是沃伦·g·弗兰奇(Warren G. French)。文集的标题反映了巴克和麦基在引言中提出的南方电影研究的引人注目的框架:“南方”远不是一个边缘或仅仅是一组地区性的比喻和图像，而是美国电影制作及其构建的国家叙事发展中不可或缺的一部分。根据电影、后现代主义、精神分析和后殖民主义的理论，他们将“南方想象”的概念定义为“关于一个不断变化的地理区域和时间的图像、思想、态度、实践、语言口音、历史和幻想的一个无定形的、有时是相互冲突的集合”(2)。巴克和麦基以及他们的作者，没有兴趣解构电影中的区域形象，以呈现一个更“准确”或更糟糕的是，更“真实”的南方。相反，他们始终认为“南方从来没有像今天这样未能唤起一套稳定的定义特征”(2)。因此，接下来的14篇文章恰当地拒绝了简单的定义和地理精确定位，以唤起一套不稳定的，甚至是矛盾的南方:同时是双种族的和多种族的，向后看的和面向未来的，区域的和国家的，地方的和全球的。《美国电影与南方想象》是一本出色的书，它设法在一本书中涵盖了各种类型和电影。作者来自英语、电影研究、非裔美国人和印第安人研究以及音乐学等领域，他们讨论了30多部电影，包括无声电影、大制作电影、经典电影、独立电影、纪录片、声望电影和不那么高水准的项目。其中包括人们期望在这样一个收藏中看到的标志性电影——《一个国家的诞生》、《乱世佳人》、《哦，兄弟》、《你在哪里?》还有一些不太知名的作品，比如《懒虫》、《红海龟》和《小树的教育》等等。毫不奇怪，这本合集的灵感来自于编辑们在密西西比大学教授南方电影课程的经历，以及个人文章中涉及的各种电影——以及巴克和麦基在引言中概述的对南方电影史的简短而深远的概述——使这本合集成为美国文化和电影研究的高级本科和研究生课程的理想读物。…
{"title":"American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary","authors":"Amy Clukey","doi":"10.5860/choice.49-0747","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.49-0747","url":null,"abstract":"American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary edited by Deborah E. Barker and Kathryn McKee. Athens, GA: U. of Georgia Press, 2011. Pp. ix + 374. Paper $24.95. The University of Georgia's New Southern Studies series continues to put out books of strong interest to southernists with the publication of American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary. Edited by Deborah E. Barker and Kathryn McKee, this collection undertakes an \"exploration of the ways in which the southern imaginary is constitutive of American cinema and of the ways in which the makers of movies ... have imagined the 'South' both to construct and to unsettle national narratives\" (1). In view of Southern studies' long-standing interdisciplinary attention to the production and circulation of visual imagery and iconographies of southernness, a consideration of the South in film that approaches the topic through the lens of the New Southern Studies--that is, one that rejects exceptionalist and essentialist narratives and interpretations in favor of a more expansive, shifting, or even transnational \"South\"--is long overdue. Indeed, the last edited collection on the topic, The South in Film, edited by Warren G. French, appeared thirty years ago. The collection's title reflects the compelling framework for Southern film studies that Barker and McKee set out in the introduction: that, far from being a marginal or merely regional set of tropes and images, the \"South\" has been integral to the development of American filmmaking and the national narratives it constructs. Drawing on theories of film, postmodernism, psychoanalysis, and postcolonialism, they define the concept of \"the southern imaginary\" as \"an amorphous and sometimes conflicting collection of images, ideas, attitudes, practices, linguistic accents, histories, and fantasies about a shifting geographic region and time\" (2). Barker and McKee, and their contributors, have no interest in deconstructing regional images in film in order to present a more \"accurate\" or, worse, more \"authentic\" South. Rather, they consistently argue that \"never more so than today has the South failed to call forth a set of stable defining features\" (2). Appropriately, then, the fourteen essays that follow reject easy definition and geographical pinpointing in order to evoke a panoply of unstable, even contradictory, Souths: at once biracial and multiethnic, backwards looking and future oriented, regional and national, local and global. American Cinema and the Southern Imaginary is remarkable for the range of genres and films it manages to cover in a single volume. The contributors--a wide-ranging group drawn from English, film studies, African American and Native American studies, and musicology--discuss over thirty films such as silents, big-budget productions, classics, indies, documentaries, prestige films, and less high-minded projects. These include iconic films that one would expect in such a collection--The Birth of a Nation, Gone with the Wind, O Brother,","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2011-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71134933","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Milton and Maternal Mortality by Louis Schwartz. Cambridge U. Press, 2009. Pp.282. Paper $36.99. This is a smart, elegant book that powerfully illuminates our understanding of Milton and women. It accomplishes this by focusing upon a historical problem: the high rate of maternal mortality in seventeenth-century London. This was, of course, a problem of considerable personal import to John Milton, who witnessed the childbirth death of two of his three wives. In the hands of a less thoughtful critic, this book could have exemplified a certain type of reductive new historicist criticism. But Milton and Maternal Mortality is the result of Schwartz's long engagement with this subject and his analysis is consistently nuanced, complex, and thought provoking. Milton and Maternal Mortality, which won the James Holly Hanford Book Award from the Milton Society of America in 2010, is divided into three parts. The first three chapters provide a historical framework, as Schwartz outlines the seventeenth-century understanding of unproblematic childbirth, discusses how and why "things went wrong," and articulates seventeenth-century religious understandings of maternal mortality. In these chapters, Schwartz brings together material from obstetric manuals, religious discourses, and demographic analyses to provide a comprehensive account of the discourses surrounding seventeenth-century childbirth. (I could imagine assigning these chapters profitably in a course on early modern women writers.) But what I especially admire about these chapters is Schwartz's recognition that the religious discourses surrounding childbirth offered women (and early modern culture generally) a hermeneutic framework through which they could conceptualize the dangers of childbirth positively, as an act of voluntary submission to the divine will. Schwartz's greatest strength lies in his sensitive readings of Milton's poetry. The second section explores the representation of maternal mortality in Milton's early poetry, while the remainder of the book examines Milton's later poetic work. Schwartz's approach allows him to provide valuable insights into works not typically considered relevant to the problem of maternal mortality (such as "On Shakespear"), but his best readings concern texts in which Milton explicitly grapples with the problem of childbirth death. Schwartz's analysis of the "Epitaph for the Marchioness of Winchester," for example, addresses this little-discussed poem both in terms of its literary accomplishment and its relevance to the ongoing poetic anxieties that Milton experienced early in his career. …
{"title":"Milton and Maternal Mortality","authors":"P. Mcquade","doi":"10.5860/choice.47-4894","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.47-4894","url":null,"abstract":"Milton and Maternal Mortality by Louis Schwartz. Cambridge U. Press, 2009. Pp.282. Paper $36.99. This is a smart, elegant book that powerfully illuminates our understanding of Milton and women. It accomplishes this by focusing upon a historical problem: the high rate of maternal mortality in seventeenth-century London. This was, of course, a problem of considerable personal import to John Milton, who witnessed the childbirth death of two of his three wives. In the hands of a less thoughtful critic, this book could have exemplified a certain type of reductive new historicist criticism. But Milton and Maternal Mortality is the result of Schwartz's long engagement with this subject and his analysis is consistently nuanced, complex, and thought provoking. Milton and Maternal Mortality, which won the James Holly Hanford Book Award from the Milton Society of America in 2010, is divided into three parts. The first three chapters provide a historical framework, as Schwartz outlines the seventeenth-century understanding of unproblematic childbirth, discusses how and why \"things went wrong,\" and articulates seventeenth-century religious understandings of maternal mortality. In these chapters, Schwartz brings together material from obstetric manuals, religious discourses, and demographic analyses to provide a comprehensive account of the discourses surrounding seventeenth-century childbirth. (I could imagine assigning these chapters profitably in a course on early modern women writers.) But what I especially admire about these chapters is Schwartz's recognition that the religious discourses surrounding childbirth offered women (and early modern culture generally) a hermeneutic framework through which they could conceptualize the dangers of childbirth positively, as an act of voluntary submission to the divine will. Schwartz's greatest strength lies in his sensitive readings of Milton's poetry. The second section explores the representation of maternal mortality in Milton's early poetry, while the remainder of the book examines Milton's later poetic work. Schwartz's approach allows him to provide valuable insights into works not typically considered relevant to the problem of maternal mortality (such as \"On Shakespear\"), but his best readings concern texts in which Milton explicitly grapples with the problem of childbirth death. Schwartz's analysis of the \"Epitaph for the Marchioness of Winchester,\" for example, addresses this little-discussed poem both in terms of its literary accomplishment and its relevance to the ongoing poetic anxieties that Milton experienced early in his career. …","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71129282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2007-09-22DOI: 10.5040/9781474292078.ch-001
E. Levy
Hamlet opens on intense attention to time, as the sentries "watch the minutes of this night" (1.1.30). (1) The emphasis gains thematic depth when Hamlet formulates his predicament in terms of temporal dislocation: "The time is out of joint. O cursed spite, / That ever I was born to set it right" (1.5.196-97). The problem of time is raised to philosophical status in Polonius's rhetoric: "Why day is day, night night, and time is time" (2.2.88). The importance of time in Hamlet has provoked numerous studies, but none has approached the marter through recourse to the temporal analysis of John McTaggart, whose celebrated article on the unreality of time, published in 1908 and later republished in the second volume of his metaphysical work, The Nature of Existence, is often recognized as the seminal treatise in the philosophy of rime of the last one hundred years. (2) Though virtually no philosophers have defended McTaggart's claim that time is unreal, scores of them, in hundreds of articles and books on the subject, have addressed some aspect of his description of the two temporal series proper to time (or, more precisely, the notion of time). These two series, easily defined, can serve as powerful lenses though which to analyze and illumine the structure of rime in Hamlet. The result of our inquiry will be a new understanding of the representation of time--or, more precisely, what Gerhard Dohrn-van-Rossum terms "time-consciousness"--in the text. (3) For the elements which we shall draw from McTaggart are not theoretical (in the sense of imposing ideational constructs on reality or what actually is), but descriptive, in the sense of articulating the actual conceptual content of the notion of time--what E.J. Lowe calls the "indispensable ingredients in our understanding of what time is" and what L. Nathan Oaklander calls the "two ways in which we ordinarily conceive and talk about time." (4) Despite the fact that McTaggart's theory of the non-reality of time turned out historically to be a dead end, his succinct and penetrating analysis of what time is conceptually--what concepts are intrinsic to the very idea of time--has exercised profound and lasting influence on philosophers of time, ever since he published his formulations. Ironically, though ultimately concerned with demonstrating that time is not, McTaggart's analysis has become indispensable to many philosophers in defining what time is. But before proceeding with this investigation, brief recapitulation of earlier approaches to the problem of time in Hamlet will contextualize discussion. A convenient introduction to such considerations concerns emphasis on the Renaissance as the period when temporal awareness broke through to a new level. Georges Poulet stresses the upsurge in the sense of transience: "It is indeed true that one felt then as always, and perhaps more keenly then ever before, the precarious and fugitive character of each lived moment." David Scott Kastan elaborates on this aspec
《哈姆雷特》一开场就表现了对时间的高度关注，哨兵们“注视着今夜的分分秒秒”(1.1.30)。(1)当哈姆雷特用时间错位来表述他的困境时，强调的重点增加了主题的深度:“时间脱离了关节。啊，可诅咒的怨恨，/我生来就是为了纠正它”(1.5.196-97)。在波洛涅斯的修辞学中，时间问题被提升到哲学的地位:“为什么白天是白天，黑夜是黑夜，时间是时间”(2.2.88)。《哈姆雷特》中时间的重要性引发了无数的研究，但没有人通过约翰·麦克塔格特的时间分析来探讨这个问题。麦克塔格特在1908年发表了一篇著名的关于时间的非现实性的文章，后来在他的形而上学著作《存在的本质》第二卷中再版，这篇文章通常被认为是过去一百年来时间哲学的开创性论文。(2)虽然实际上没有哲学家为麦克塔格特关于时间是不真实的主张辩护，但他们中的许多人，在关于这个主题的数百篇文章和书籍中，已经讨论了他对两个时间序列(或者更准确地说，时间概念)的描述的某些方面。这两个系列，很容易定义，可以作为强有力的镜头，通过它们来分析和阐明《哈姆雷特》的时间结构。我们调查的结果将是对时间表征的新理解——或者，更准确地说，Gerhard Dohrn-van-Rossum所说的“时间意识”——在文本中。(3)因为我们将从麦克塔格特那里汲取的要素并不是理论的(就把概念构念强加于现实或实际存在的东西上的意义而言)，而是描述性的，就阐明时间概念的实际概念性意旨的意义而言——即E.J.洛所说的“我们理解时间是什么不可或缺的成分”，以及L.内森·奥克兰德所说的“我们通常构想和谈论时间的两种方式”。(4)尽管麦克塔格特关于时间非实在性的理论在历史上被证明是一条死胡同，但自从他发表了他的公式以来，他对时间在概念上是什么——什么概念是时间概念所固有的——的简洁而深刻的分析，对时间哲学家产生了深远而持久的影响。具有讽刺意味的是，尽管最终关注的是证明时间不存在，但对于许多哲学家来说，在定义时间是什么时，麦克塔格特的分析已经成为不可或缺的。但在继续这个调查之前，简要回顾一下之前对《哈姆雷特》中时间问题的处理方法，将讨论置于语境中。对这些考虑的一个方便的介绍是，强调文艺复兴时期是时间意识突破到一个新水平的时期。乔治·波莱特(Georges Poulet)强调了短暂感中的高涨:“人们确实会一如既往地感受到，也许比以往任何时候都更加敏锐，感受到每一个生命时刻的不稳定和短暂性。”David Scott Kastan详细阐述了文艺复兴时期人的时间意识的这一方面:“在他的世界里，单向和不可逆的时间流动带来了一种强烈的脆弱感和不稳定性。”里卡多·奎诺内斯(Ricardo Quinones)强调了这种时间上的不安全感，他指出文艺复兴时期对时间的土星性质的关注，以其“威胁性和破坏性”的活动来解释，类似于神话中的土星(Saturn)，即消耗自己后代的神。其他学者通过关注历史视角的成就，突出了文艺复兴时期时间性的更多积极方面。例如，欧文·帕诺夫斯基(Erwin Panofsky)强调了对古典文本进行深入的文字学研究的作用，这使得对古代文明的理解“作为一种本身完整的现象，但属于过去，在历史上与当代世界分离”。Dohrn-van-Rossum谈到了新兴技术在培养对过去和现在之间差异的认识方面的作用:“最迟从15世纪初开始，对发明的关注发展了一个历史的视角。…
{"title":"The Mimesis of Time in Hamlet","authors":"E. Levy","doi":"10.5040/9781474292078.ch-001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474292078.ch-001","url":null,"abstract":"Hamlet opens on intense attention to time, as the sentries \"watch the minutes of this night\" (1.1.30). (1) The emphasis gains thematic depth when Hamlet formulates his predicament in terms of temporal dislocation: \"The time is out of joint. O cursed spite, / That ever I was born to set it right\" (1.5.196-97). The problem of time is raised to philosophical status in Polonius's rhetoric: \"Why day is day, night night, and time is time\" (2.2.88). The importance of time in Hamlet has provoked numerous studies, but none has approached the marter through recourse to the temporal analysis of John McTaggart, whose celebrated article on the unreality of time, published in 1908 and later republished in the second volume of his metaphysical work, The Nature of Existence, is often recognized as the seminal treatise in the philosophy of rime of the last one hundred years. (2) Though virtually no philosophers have defended McTaggart's claim that time is unreal, scores of them, in hundreds of articles and books on the subject, have addressed some aspect of his description of the two temporal series proper to time (or, more precisely, the notion of time). These two series, easily defined, can serve as powerful lenses though which to analyze and illumine the structure of rime in Hamlet. The result of our inquiry will be a new understanding of the representation of time--or, more precisely, what Gerhard Dohrn-van-Rossum terms \"time-consciousness\"--in the text. (3) For the elements which we shall draw from McTaggart are not theoretical (in the sense of imposing ideational constructs on reality or what actually is), but descriptive, in the sense of articulating the actual conceptual content of the notion of time--what E.J. Lowe calls the \"indispensable ingredients in our understanding of what time is\" and what L. Nathan Oaklander calls the \"two ways in which we ordinarily conceive and talk about time.\" (4) Despite the fact that McTaggart's theory of the non-reality of time turned out historically to be a dead end, his succinct and penetrating analysis of what time is conceptually--what concepts are intrinsic to the very idea of time--has exercised profound and lasting influence on philosophers of time, ever since he published his formulations. Ironically, though ultimately concerned with demonstrating that time is not, McTaggart's analysis has become indispensable to many philosophers in defining what time is. But before proceeding with this investigation, brief recapitulation of earlier approaches to the problem of time in Hamlet will contextualize discussion. A convenient introduction to such considerations concerns emphasis on the Renaissance as the period when temporal awareness broke through to a new level. Georges Poulet stresses the upsurge in the sense of transience: \"It is indeed true that one felt then as always, and perhaps more keenly then ever before, the precarious and fugitive character of each lived moment.\" David Scott Kastan elaborates on this aspec","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"70529713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell by Diane Kelsey McColley. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2007. Pp. 252. $89.95. Halfway through his essay "Walking," H. D. Thoreau asks "Where is the literature which gives expression to Nature?" The question is rhetorical. He has already announced his own intent to speak for Nature, and turned to survey the territory behind, where he finds little in the way of precedent or guidance: English literature, from the days of the minstrels to the Lake Poets--Chaucer and Spenser and Milton, and even Shakespeare included, breathes no quite flesh and in this sense wild strain. It is an essentially tame and civilized literature reflecting Greece and Rome. Her wilderness is a green-wood--her wild man a Robinhood. There is plenty of genial love of Nature, but not so much of Nature herself. The literature that speaks for Nature is yet to come, or so it would seem. Thoreau's gesture is at once a ground-clearing and an investiture; it heralds the American tradition of nature writing, which has at heart the belief that before the nineteenth century "Nature herself" is mostly absent from Western literature. This is also a central tenet of ecocriticism, which generally does not regard early modern literature as ecological in its concerns or sensibilities. Although Thoreau's name does not appear in Diane McColley's Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell, it is largely his judgment on English literature and its formidable critical legacy that the author has in her sights when she announces her intent to challenge the notion "that pre-Romantic and pre-Darwinian poetry, especially if it is monotheistically religious, is intrinsically unecological, or that 'ecocriticism' of it is intrinsically anachronistic" (1). The book's central argument is that many English poets of the seventeenth century, including Milton and Marvell, but also George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, and Margaret Cavendish, among others, demonstrate sensibilities properly deemed "ecological" when they criticize contemporary practices of deforestation, pollution, and large-scale mining; show regard for plants and animals as "fellow creatures whose lives belong to themselves"; and promote a sense of kinship with and empathy for all living things by means of "language responsive, in sound and form as well as image and thought, to the lives of plants, animals, elements and places" (1, 7). McColley chooses the modern term "ecology" over the classical and early modern term "economy" because, she says, "economy," with its roots in the Greek words oikos (household) and nomos (law), designates the management of an estate for human benefit, while "ecology," with its root logos (word, knowledge), "suggests that our use of knowledge needs to be good for the whole household of living things" (1). Ecology, then, concerns the knowledge of nature in itself, as opposed to knowledge of its use-value for humans; it also involves the intimate personal engagement o
{"title":"Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell","authors":"M. Brady","doi":"10.5860/choice.45-4233","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.45-4233","url":null,"abstract":"Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell by Diane Kelsey McColley. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2007. Pp. 252. $89.95. Halfway through his essay \"Walking,\" H. D. Thoreau asks \"Where is the literature which gives expression to Nature?\" The question is rhetorical. He has already announced his own intent to speak for Nature, and turned to survey the territory behind, where he finds little in the way of precedent or guidance: English literature, from the days of the minstrels to the Lake Poets--Chaucer and Spenser and Milton, and even Shakespeare included, breathes no quite flesh and in this sense wild strain. It is an essentially tame and civilized literature reflecting Greece and Rome. Her wilderness is a green-wood--her wild man a Robinhood. There is plenty of genial love of Nature, but not so much of Nature herself. The literature that speaks for Nature is yet to come, or so it would seem. Thoreau's gesture is at once a ground-clearing and an investiture; it heralds the American tradition of nature writing, which has at heart the belief that before the nineteenth century \"Nature herself\" is mostly absent from Western literature. This is also a central tenet of ecocriticism, which generally does not regard early modern literature as ecological in its concerns or sensibilities. Although Thoreau's name does not appear in Diane McColley's Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell, it is largely his judgment on English literature and its formidable critical legacy that the author has in her sights when she announces her intent to challenge the notion \"that pre-Romantic and pre-Darwinian poetry, especially if it is monotheistically religious, is intrinsically unecological, or that 'ecocriticism' of it is intrinsically anachronistic\" (1). The book's central argument is that many English poets of the seventeenth century, including Milton and Marvell, but also George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, and Margaret Cavendish, among others, demonstrate sensibilities properly deemed \"ecological\" when they criticize contemporary practices of deforestation, pollution, and large-scale mining; show regard for plants and animals as \"fellow creatures whose lives belong to themselves\"; and promote a sense of kinship with and empathy for all living things by means of \"language responsive, in sound and form as well as image and thought, to the lives of plants, animals, elements and places\" (1, 7). McColley chooses the modern term \"ecology\" over the classical and early modern term \"economy\" because, she says, \"economy,\" with its roots in the Greek words oikos (household) and nomos (law), designates the management of an estate for human benefit, while \"ecology,\" with its root logos (word, knowledge), \"suggests that our use of knowledge needs to be good for the whole household of living things\" (1). Ecology, then, concerns the knowledge of nature in itself, as opposed to knowledge of its use-value for humans; it also involves the intimate personal engagement o","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71119430","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","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：