Pub Date : 2019-01-22DOI: 10.4324/9781351323284-12
Eugene Goodheart
{"title":"Counterlives: Philip Roth in Autobiography and Fiction","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-12","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114353849","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}
{"title":"Censorship and Self-Censorship in the Fiction of D. H. Lawrence","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-7","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129268027","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}
{"title":"What May Knew in The Beast in the Jungle","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-5","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123289985","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}
{"title":"“Sex Consciousness” and the Novel: A Room of One's Own","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129560827","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 : 2019-01-22DOI: 10.4324/9781351323284-13
Eugene Goodheart
{"title":"Four Decades of Contemporary American Fiction","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-13","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115911374","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}
IN the age of perspectivism, in which all claims to au thority are suspect, the omniscient narrator is an archaism to be patronized when it is found in the works of the past and to be scorned when it appears in contemporary work. Omniscience is no longer an entitlement of the novelist. Sartre made the case against omniscience in his attack on Fran?ois Mauriac. "Like most of our writers, he has tried to ignore the fact that the theory of relativity applies in full to the universe of fiction, that there is no more place for a privileged observer in a real novel than in the world of Einstein." In the Anglo American tradition Henry James's preoccupation with "point of view" both in his theory and his practice unsettled the con fidence of novelists and critics in the possibility of objective narration. For Mikhail Bakhtin, currently the most influential theorist of the novel, omniscience is the tyranny of the mono logic to which he opposes the dialogic. The novelist, in his view, refuses or should refuse authority to the voice of any single character, including the narrator. The novel is a con testation of voices, producing a polyphony that tends toward discord rather than harmony. Even the voice of the individual character is a hybrid divided against itself. Sartre's critique is motivated by an atheistic hostility to presumptions to "divine omniscience and omnipotence," James's by a psychological realism that depicts felt experience, and Bakhtin's by an antiauthoritarian desire to allow all voices, especially those of the repressed, to express themselves. From their different perspectives, each of the critics identifies the omniscient narrator with inauthenticity or authoritarianism. The last significant attempt to defend omniscient or objective
{"title":"“The Licensed Trespasser”: The Omniscient Narrator in Middlemarch","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-1","url":null,"abstract":"IN the age of perspectivism, in which all claims to au thority are suspect, the omniscient narrator is an archaism to be patronized when it is found in the works of the past and to be scorned when it appears in contemporary work. Omniscience is no longer an entitlement of the novelist. Sartre made the case against omniscience in his attack on Fran?ois Mauriac. \"Like most of our writers, he has tried to ignore the fact that the theory of relativity applies in full to the universe of fiction, that there is no more place for a privileged observer in a real novel than in the world of Einstein.\" In the Anglo American tradition Henry James's preoccupation with \"point of view\" both in his theory and his practice unsettled the con fidence of novelists and critics in the possibility of objective narration. For Mikhail Bakhtin, currently the most influential theorist of the novel, omniscience is the tyranny of the mono logic to which he opposes the dialogic. The novelist, in his view, refuses or should refuse authority to the voice of any single character, including the narrator. The novel is a con testation of voices, producing a polyphony that tends toward discord rather than harmony. Even the voice of the individual character is a hybrid divided against itself. Sartre's critique is motivated by an atheistic hostility to presumptions to \"divine omniscience and omnipotence,\" James's by a psychological realism that depicts felt experience, and Bakhtin's by an antiauthoritarian desire to allow all voices, especially those of the repressed, to express themselves. From their different perspectives, each of the critics identifies the omniscient narrator with inauthenticity or authoritarianism. The last significant attempt to defend omniscient or objective","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"105 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131761509","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}
IN his biography of Ford Madox Ford, Max Saunders tells us that "apart from a passing reference to having known about?and disapproved of?The Interpretation of Dreams, there is no record of Ford's having read Freud." Saunders notes, however, that the influence of Freud's ideas about the Oedipus complex is probable. There is, I am sure, no evidence that Freud read Ford, so we cannot speak of influence in either direction. Whatever Ford thought of Freud or Freud might have thought of Ford, we can speak of an affinity be tween them. Many of Freud's influential ideas, more or less developed, were already circulating, in various versions, during and before the time the master came on the scene to give them their masterly formulations. Lawrence, who began writing Sons and Lovers before he knew anything of Freud, strengthened its oedipal theme when Frieda intro duced him to Freud's ideas. Ford's imaginative concerns anticipate those of Freud, as Sondra Stang has pointed out in the connection she makes between The Good Soldier and the two late essays, Beyond the Pleasure Principle and Civilization and Its Discontents, published five and fifteen years respectively after The Good Soldier (1915). Dowell, the narrator of the novel, has been contemned by critics who fault him for na?vet? and obtuseness in his mar riage and friendships. And yet how can we not be impressed with the range, incisiveness, and eloquence of his speculations about civilization and the passions? His language at times brings Freud to mind. He wonders, for instance, how it is possible that he does not know whether a remark Leonora makes is that of a harlot or a decent woman and moves im mediately to generalize his ignorance to "one"?that is to everyone. "Yet, if one doesn't know that at this hour and day,
在福特·马多克斯·福特的传记中，马克斯·桑德斯告诉我们，“除了偶然提到知道?不赞成?《梦的解析》中并没有福特读过弗洛伊德的记录然而，桑德斯指出，弗洛伊德关于俄狄浦斯情结的思想的影响是可能的。我敢肯定，没有证据表明弗洛伊德读过福特的书，所以我们不能说有任何影响。无论福特如何看待弗洛伊德，或者弗洛伊德如何看待福特，我们可以说他们之间有一种亲近感。弗洛伊德的许多有影响力的思想，或多或少得到了发展，在大师出现并给出他们精湛的公式之前，已经以各种版本流传开来。劳伦斯在对弗洛伊德一无所知之前就开始写《儿子与情人》，当弗里达向他介绍弗洛伊德的思想时，他加强了小说的俄狄浦斯主题。正如桑德拉·斯坦(Sondra Stang)在《好士兵》与《超越快乐原则》(Beyond the Pleasure Principle)和《文明及其不满》(Civilization and Its Discontents)这两篇文章之间的联系中所指出的那样，福特的想象力早于弗洛伊德。这两篇文章分别在《好士兵》(1915)出版5年和15年后出版。小说的叙述者道尔一直受到评论家的蔑视，他们指责他天真幼稚。他的婚姻和友谊也很迟钝。然而，我们怎能不被他对文明和激情的广泛、敏锐和雄辩的思考所打动呢?他的语言有时会让人想起弗洛伊德。例如，他想知道，他怎么可能不知道利奥诺拉所说的话是妓女还是正派女人，并立即将他的无知概括为“一个”?这是对每个人说的。“然而，如果人们不知道此时此刻，
{"title":"The Art of Ambivalence: The Good Soldier","authors":"Eugene Goodheart","doi":"10.4324/9781351323284-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351323284-4","url":null,"abstract":"IN his biography of Ford Madox Ford, Max Saunders tells us that \"apart from a passing reference to having known about?and disapproved of?The Interpretation of Dreams, there is no record of Ford's having read Freud.\" Saunders notes, however, that the influence of Freud's ideas about the Oedipus complex is probable. There is, I am sure, no evidence that Freud read Ford, so we cannot speak of influence in either direction. Whatever Ford thought of Freud or Freud might have thought of Ford, we can speak of an affinity be tween them. Many of Freud's influential ideas, more or less developed, were already circulating, in various versions, during and before the time the master came on the scene to give them their masterly formulations. Lawrence, who began writing Sons and Lovers before he knew anything of Freud, strengthened its oedipal theme when Frieda intro duced him to Freud's ideas. Ford's imaginative concerns anticipate those of Freud, as Sondra Stang has pointed out in the connection she makes between The Good Soldier and the two late essays, Beyond the Pleasure Principle and Civilization and Its Discontents, published five and fifteen years respectively after The Good Soldier (1915). Dowell, the narrator of the novel, has been contemned by critics who fault him for na?vet? and obtuseness in his mar riage and friendships. And yet how can we not be impressed with the range, incisiveness, and eloquence of his speculations about civilization and the passions? His language at times brings Freud to mind. He wonders, for instance, how it is possible that he does not know whether a remark Leonora makes is that of a harlot or a decent woman and moves im mediately to generalize his ignorance to \"one\"?that is to everyone. \"Yet, if one doesn't know that at this hour and day,","PeriodicalId":445244,"journal":{"name":"Novel Practices","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114440155","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：