Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907208
Kylan Rice
"Bird, Jewel, or Flower?"On the Tokenization of Nineteenth-Century Women's Poetry Kylan Rice During the first half of the nineteenth century, women's poetry grew in popularity and gained unprecedented visibility as it circulated on both sides of the Atlantic in literary annuals and gift-books.1 Collecting prose and poetry by both male and female writers, these expensively produced volumes were marketed as gifts for women that could be presented as souvenirs or tokens of love.2 Frequently used by men as "courtship objects" or "physical mementos of desire or intimacy," literary annuals bore titles like Forget Me Not, Token of Remembrance, Souvenir, Keepsake, Leaflets of Memory, Memorial, or Remember Me, often including poems and frame texts that petitioned the recipient to remember and permanently cherish the romantic affections of the giver.3 In this way, they helped to codify a gendered expectation that obliged nineteenth-century women to perform memory-work while tacitly granting men the freedom to forget. Given its "reflexive" nature, where the contents of each volume were designed to provide "instructions" that "model[ed]" to recipients how they should consume it, many of the individual poems included in literary annuals and gift-books show women performing their commitment to men by preserving tokens of love.4 It was not uncommon for these poems to be written by female poets. For instance, appearing in a gift-book called The Moss-Rose, A Parting Token (1840), the American poet Lucy Hooper's "The Turquoise Ring" is a narrative poem that describes a woman who is "made to preserve" a turquoise ring given to her by a lover before separating from each other for an extended period of time.5 In Hooper's poem, the woman's "fervent … belief" in the "power" of the ring as a memento that "link[s] the future to all the past" is "met with its appropriate reward"—her lover's continued faithfulness and eventual return, a conclusion suggesting that a man's fidelity is contingent on the woman who cherishes his gifts.6 For readers of annuals, this insight also applied to "tokens" like The Moss-Rose [End Page 767] which featured poems by female writers like Hooper, who modeled the gendered dynamics of gift exchange that drove the circulation of literary annuals, portraying women as repositories of romantic memory. However, even as they adhered to the conventions of a literary gift economy, writing poems that show women performing requisite memory-work, some female poets also challenged this charge, recognizing that the occupation of remembering made it easier to be forgotten. For instance, in "Medallion Wafers" (1823), a series of ekphrastic poems representing images impressed in paste by an intaglio seal, the English poet Letitia Elizabeth Landon (L. E. L.) critiques what she identifies as "woman's weary lot," which is "to love" and then, in the aftermath of love, to "be forgot."7 If, as Landon complains, "love, love is all a woman's fame," then failing to lov
“鸟，宝石，还是花?”19世纪上半叶，女性诗歌越来越受欢迎，在大西洋两岸的文学年鉴和礼品册上流传，获得了前所未有的知名度收集了男性和女性作家的散文和诗歌，这些制作昂贵的书籍作为礼物出售给女性，可以作为纪念品或爱情的象征经常被男人用作“求爱对象”或“欲望或亲密的实物纪念品”，文学年鉴有诸如“勿忘我”、“纪念纪念品”、“纪念品”、“记忆传单”、“纪念”或“记住我”之类的标题，通常包括诗歌和框架文本，请求接受者记住并永远珍惜送礼者的浪漫感情通过这种方式，他们帮助编纂了一种性别期望，这种期望迫使19世纪的女性进行记忆工作，同时默认地给予男性遗忘的自由。鉴于诗歌的“反射性”，即每一卷的内容都旨在为接受者提供“指导”，为他们应该如何消费提供“模型”，文学年鉴和礼品书中包含的许多诗歌都表明，女性通过保存爱的象征来履行对男性的承诺这些诗是由女诗人写的，这并不罕见。例如，美国诗人露西·胡珀(Lucy Hooper)的《绿松石戒指》(The Turquoise Ring)是一首叙事诗，出现在一本名为《莫斯-玫瑰，一种离别的象征》(1840)的礼品册中，它描述了一个女人在与情人长时间分离之前，“被迫保存”情人送给她的绿松石戒指在Hooper的诗中，女人对戒指作为“连接未来和过去”的纪念品的“力量”的“狂热信仰”“得到了适当的回报”——她的爱人持续的忠诚和最终的回归，这一结论表明男人的忠诚取决于珍惜他的礼物的女人对于年刊的读者来说，这种见解也适用于“象征”，比如《青苔玫瑰》(The Moss-Rose)，它以像胡珀这样的女性作家的诗歌为特色，她模仿了推动文学年刊流通的礼物交换的性别动态，将女性描绘成浪漫记忆的仓库。然而，即使她们遵守文学礼物经济的惯例，写诗展示女性进行必要的记忆工作，一些女性诗人也挑战了这一指控，认识到记忆的职业使人们更容易被遗忘。例如，在1823年出版的《大奖章》(Medallion Wafers)中，英国诗人利蒂夏·伊丽莎白·兰登(Letitia Elizabeth Landon, l.e.l.)用一组生动的诗歌，描绘了用浮雕印印成的形象，她在诗中批评了她所认为的“女人疲惫的命运”，即“去爱”，然后在爱之后“被遗忘”。如果像兰登抱怨的那样，“爱，爱都是女人的名声”，那么，不爱或失去爱就和被公众遗忘一样好，至少在一个文学市场的背景下，这个市场允许以亲密的礼物交换为幌子传播女性诗歌兰登的《华夫片》在第一本英文年刊出版的同一年刊登在《文学公报》上，评论家们认为这是对同样的“资产阶级对廉价批量生产的艺术品的需求”的评论，这种需求促成了19世纪早期流行文化中年刊和礼品书的迅速传播。兰登的《华夫片》预示了17年后胡珀的诗，表明女性如何被期望记住，“珍惜最轻微的东西/触摸，观看，他们用自己的诗来表现或模仿这种珍惜，试图避免被爱人和读者遗忘当然，正如兰登有先见之明地观察到的那样，遗忘无论如何都是注定要发生的，即使是作为尊重“勿忘我”条款的直接后果:注定要记住，女人被过去所诅咒，而世界上的其他人则忘记并继续前进。事实上，它确实忘记了，如果当前的学术研究有任何迹象的话，被引导为……
{"title":"\"Bird, Jewel, or Flower?\": On the Tokenization of Nineteenth-Century Women's Poetry","authors":"Kylan Rice","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907208","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907208","url":null,"abstract":"\"Bird, Jewel, or Flower?\"On the Tokenization of Nineteenth-Century Women's Poetry Kylan Rice During the first half of the nineteenth century, women's poetry grew in popularity and gained unprecedented visibility as it circulated on both sides of the Atlantic in literary annuals and gift-books.1 Collecting prose and poetry by both male and female writers, these expensively produced volumes were marketed as gifts for women that could be presented as souvenirs or tokens of love.2 Frequently used by men as \"courtship objects\" or \"physical mementos of desire or intimacy,\" literary annuals bore titles like Forget Me Not, Token of Remembrance, Souvenir, Keepsake, Leaflets of Memory, Memorial, or Remember Me, often including poems and frame texts that petitioned the recipient to remember and permanently cherish the romantic affections of the giver.3 In this way, they helped to codify a gendered expectation that obliged nineteenth-century women to perform memory-work while tacitly granting men the freedom to forget. Given its \"reflexive\" nature, where the contents of each volume were designed to provide \"instructions\" that \"model[ed]\" to recipients how they should consume it, many of the individual poems included in literary annuals and gift-books show women performing their commitment to men by preserving tokens of love.4 It was not uncommon for these poems to be written by female poets. For instance, appearing in a gift-book called The Moss-Rose, A Parting Token (1840), the American poet Lucy Hooper's \"The Turquoise Ring\" is a narrative poem that describes a woman who is \"made to preserve\" a turquoise ring given to her by a lover before separating from each other for an extended period of time.5 In Hooper's poem, the woman's \"fervent … belief\" in the \"power\" of the ring as a memento that \"link[s] the future to all the past\" is \"met with its appropriate reward\"—her lover's continued faithfulness and eventual return, a conclusion suggesting that a man's fidelity is contingent on the woman who cherishes his gifts.6 For readers of annuals, this insight also applied to \"tokens\" like The Moss-Rose [End Page 767] which featured poems by female writers like Hooper, who modeled the gendered dynamics of gift exchange that drove the circulation of literary annuals, portraying women as repositories of romantic memory. However, even as they adhered to the conventions of a literary gift economy, writing poems that show women performing requisite memory-work, some female poets also challenged this charge, recognizing that the occupation of remembering made it easier to be forgotten. For instance, in \"Medallion Wafers\" (1823), a series of ekphrastic poems representing images impressed in paste by an intaglio seal, the English poet Letitia Elizabeth Landon (L. E. L.) critiques what she identifies as \"woman's weary lot,\" which is \"to love\" and then, in the aftermath of love, to \"be forgot.\"7 If, as Landon complains, \"love, love is all a woman's fame,\" then failing to lov","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428607","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907212
Louise Mccune
Tillie Olsen's Reproductive Aesthetics Louise Mccune David and Eva, married for forty-seven years, with several adult children long departed from their care, cannot agree how they will spend the rest of their days. David wants to move to the Haven, a cooperative retirement community where the couple's needs—for recreation, socialization, medical attention—will be not only met, but anticipated. He points to the fixtures of their worn-in home life: that wheezing vacuum begging for repair, those dirty dishes stacked in the sink, the feeling that this miserable day is no different from any other. He turns to his wife, inspired: there will be no wheezing vacuums and no dirty dishes at the Haven. There, they will be relieved of their boredom, their responsibilities, and, not least, each other. They will have reading groups to attend and outdoor space to roam. Owing to these distractions, the resentment between them may be left to wither. Like so, David makes his case, but Eva holds her line. There is no way that she will go. It's not that Eva finds their house agreeable. In fact, she doesn't like it there: she resents the chores, she resents her husband, she resents the clamor and claustrophobia that make up her domestic environment. So why does she insist upon staying? In Eva's words, she is "use't."1 She's used to the tedium of keeping a home, used to boredom and isolation, used to being all used up. For too long, she was beholden to her children, to their "tracking, smudging, littering, dirtying, engaging her in endless defeating battle" (she's kept score), and to her husband's messes, too (T, 77). She seems now to want to enjoy whatever small prizes remain after a lifetime of surrender: a small library that's been read to tatters, a record player audible only at its loudest setting, and—most of all—the stillness of a house finally emptied of children. Residence at the co-op would entail new neighbors, a new schedule, and all the trappings of communal living, so Eva demurs. Party to her protest are the very same household implements which figured in David's appeal. She runs the offending vacuum. She stands over the sink and scrubs the dirty dishes. She's too exhausted to move to the [End Page 883] Haven, and she says so by turning away from her husband's desires, toward the very same tasks that have been exhausting her for years. My interest in Tillie Olsen's novella about David and Eva, titled, Tell Me a Riddle, has to do with Eva's contradictory refusal: though she makes it quite clear that she is aggrieved by the overlapping burdens of being a mother, homemaker, and wife, she resolves to remain in her family house and attached to the various discomforts of being there. Even when presented with the option to leave, Eva doubles down on the place that's made her miserable. I will refer later in this article to a transformation in Eva's demeanor that occurs over the course of the narrative: in brief, when Eva does finally quit her domestic routine, h
大卫和伊娃结婚四十七年了，几个成年的孩子早就离开了他们的照顾，他们对如何度过余生无法达成一致。大卫想搬到Haven，这是一个合作的退休社区，在那里，夫妇俩的需求——娱乐、社交、医疗照顾——不仅会得到满足，而且会得到期待。他指着他们破旧的家庭生活的固定装置:那个呼哧呼哧地需要修理的吸尘器，那些堆在水槽里的脏盘子，这种痛苦的一天和其他任何一天都没有什么不同的感觉。他转向他的妻子，受到启发:在天堂，不会有呼哧呼哧的吸尘器，也不会有脏盘子。在那里，他们将从无聊中解脱出来，从责任中解脱出来，更重要的是，从彼此身上解脱出来。他们会有阅读小组和户外活动空间。由于这些干扰，他们之间的怨恨可能会消失。就这样，大卫提出了自己的观点，但伊娃坚持自己的立场。她是不可能走的。这并不是说伊娃觉得他们的房子令人愉快。事实上，她不喜欢那里:她讨厌家务，她讨厌她的丈夫，她讨厌吵吵闹闹和幽闭恐惧症构成了她的家庭环境。那她为什么坚持要留下来?用伊娃的话来说，她是“没用的”。她已经习惯了看家的单调乏味，习惯了无聊和孤独，习惯了筋疲力尽。太长时间以来，她对孩子们心存感激，对他们“跟踪、弄脏、乱扔垃圾、弄脏，让她卷入无休止的战斗”(她记分)，对她丈夫的混乱也心存感激(T, 77)。她现在似乎想要享受屈从一生后剩下的任何小奖品:一个被读得破烂不堪的小图书馆，一台只有把音量调到最大才能听到的电唱机，最重要的是，孩子们终于空了的房子里的寂静。住在合作公寓里意味着要有新邻居，要有新的日程安排，还要面对集体生活的种种障碍，伊娃对此表示异议。她抗议的一方是大卫呼吁使用的家用器具。她开着那个讨厌的吸尘器。她站在水池边擦洗脏盘子。她太累了，不想搬到港湾去，她这样说的方式是避开丈夫的欲望，去做那些多年来一直让她筋疲力尽的事情。我对蒂莉·奥尔森(Tillie Olsen)关于大卫和伊娃(Eva)的中篇小说《告诉我一个谜语》(Tell Me a Riddle)的兴趣，与伊娃矛盾的拒绝有关:尽管她很清楚地表示，作为母亲、家庭主妇和妻子的多重负担让她感到委屈，但她决定留在家里，并依附于在那里的各种不适。即使可以选择离开，伊娃也会在这个让她痛苦的地方加倍努力。在这篇文章的后面，我将提到伊娃在叙事过程中举止上的转变:简而言之，当伊娃最终放弃了她的家庭生活时，她愤怒的反抗变成了伤感的回忆，仿佛只要她还在做出牺牲，她就只能坚持反对她因性别而做出的许多牺牲。总之，阅读伊娃的回复被证明是很困难的。一些读者称她拒绝离开家是“一种社会抗议”，而另一些人则将其归结为惰性(比如多萝西·帕克，她把伊娃的拒绝归结为“衰老、接近死亡和愤怒的爱”)当她的拒绝被转变时，读者看到的要么是“胜利的呐喊”，要么是“摆脱家庭琐事”的勇敢转身，要么是疾病晚期的症状我自己的阅读得出的结论是，《告诉我一个谜语》的悖论，以及随之而来的批判性分歧，在奥尔森持久的关注中得到了调和，即现有的文学体裁无法有效地捕捉到她一直关注的性别劳动分工和社会再生产危机。因为她被……
{"title":"Tillie Olsen's Reproductive Aesthetics","authors":"Louise Mccune","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907212","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907212","url":null,"abstract":"Tillie Olsen's Reproductive Aesthetics Louise Mccune David and Eva, married for forty-seven years, with several adult children long departed from their care, cannot agree how they will spend the rest of their days. David wants to move to the Haven, a cooperative retirement community where the couple's needs—for recreation, socialization, medical attention—will be not only met, but anticipated. He points to the fixtures of their worn-in home life: that wheezing vacuum begging for repair, those dirty dishes stacked in the sink, the feeling that this miserable day is no different from any other. He turns to his wife, inspired: there will be no wheezing vacuums and no dirty dishes at the Haven. There, they will be relieved of their boredom, their responsibilities, and, not least, each other. They will have reading groups to attend and outdoor space to roam. Owing to these distractions, the resentment between them may be left to wither. Like so, David makes his case, but Eva holds her line. There is no way that she will go. It's not that Eva finds their house agreeable. In fact, she doesn't like it there: she resents the chores, she resents her husband, she resents the clamor and claustrophobia that make up her domestic environment. So why does she insist upon staying? In Eva's words, she is \"use't.\"1 She's used to the tedium of keeping a home, used to boredom and isolation, used to being all used up. For too long, she was beholden to her children, to their \"tracking, smudging, littering, dirtying, engaging her in endless defeating battle\" (she's kept score), and to her husband's messes, too (T, 77). She seems now to want to enjoy whatever small prizes remain after a lifetime of surrender: a small library that's been read to tatters, a record player audible only at its loudest setting, and—most of all—the stillness of a house finally emptied of children. Residence at the co-op would entail new neighbors, a new schedule, and all the trappings of communal living, so Eva demurs. Party to her protest are the very same household implements which figured in David's appeal. She runs the offending vacuum. She stands over the sink and scrubs the dirty dishes. She's too exhausted to move to the [End Page 883] Haven, and she says so by turning away from her husband's desires, toward the very same tasks that have been exhausting her for years. My interest in Tillie Olsen's novella about David and Eva, titled, Tell Me a Riddle, has to do with Eva's contradictory refusal: though she makes it quite clear that she is aggrieved by the overlapping burdens of being a mother, homemaker, and wife, she resolves to remain in her family house and attached to the various discomforts of being there. Even when presented with the option to leave, Eva doubles down on the place that's made her miserable. I will refer later in this article to a transformation in Eva's demeanor that occurs over the course of the narrative: in brief, when Eva does finally quit her domestic routine, h","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907204
Sarah Marsh
Imoinda's RebellionSovereignty, Slavery, and the Ancient Constitution in Aphra Behn's Oroonoko Sarah Marsh Indeed, the attribution of divinity to the king had probably always been motivated in some measure by the desire to limit him to actions becoming a god. —Edmund S. Morgan, Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America Oroonoko was no sooner return'd from his last Conquest, and receiv'd at Court … like a Deity, when there arriv'd in the Port an English Ship. —Aphra Behn, Oroonoko; or, The Royal Slave1 In her 1688 novel, Oroonoko; or, The Royal Slave, Aphra Behn writes of an African divine-right prince and his wife, Imoinda, who die as insurrectionists instead of living as slaves in English colonial Surinam. These characters' heroic lives and tragic deaths have led readers to study Oroonoko's transoceanic dynamics between a contested, divine-right monarchy in Stuart England and the development of chattel, racial slavery in its colonies. The consensus on this aspect of the novel remains best summarized by Laura Brown's 1987 insight that "both Charles I and Oroonoko are victims of the same historical phenomenon—those new forces in English society loosely associated with an antiabsolutist mercantile imperialism."2 Charles I and Oroonoko are similar, that is, because they are overthrown by anti-monarchical proponents of England's commercial empire. This consensus arises from scholars' appraisal of Oroonoko's execution by English slavocrats at the end of the novel, which bears unmistakable likeness to the regicide of 1649. Abrupt and brutal, this scene is the fulcrum on which critical attention to sovereignty, [End Page 639] slavery, and race in Oroonoko turns.3 Scholars' focus on the execution is noteworthy because, while spectacular, the event occupies just three paragraphs of the story. By contrast, the slave rebellion in Oroonoko—which also dramatizes the relation of sovereignty, slavery, and race—is typically noticed only in passing.4 And yet: this rebellion consumes the attention of Oroonoko's narrator and directs the novel's plot. Imoinda's justification for the rebellion, a moral claim in herself against sovereign and slaveholding tyranny, coordinates the novel's dual episodes in Coramantien and Surinam. Both the rebellion and its suppression are framed by a racializing vocabulary through which Africans, regardless of social rank, are animalized into chattels along the color line. Imoinda, consort to the Coramantee heir apparent Oroonoko, rebels to stop her family's chattelization by the English; in turn, the English retrench in the colony by animalizing Oroonoko. The rebellion's nuances disclose the power dynamics of sovereignty, slavery, and race in much greater detail than can be understood through Oroonoko's execution alone. This essay's fundamental claim is that the slave rebellion in Oroonoko is a comprehensive study of how anti-tyrannicism, exemplified by Imoinda, collapses under the evolving colonial p
{"title":"Imoinda's Rebellion: Sovereignty, Slavery, and the Ancient Constitution in Aphra Behn's Oroonoko","authors":"Sarah Marsh","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907204","url":null,"abstract":"Imoinda's RebellionSovereignty, Slavery, and the Ancient Constitution in Aphra Behn's Oroonoko Sarah Marsh Indeed, the attribution of divinity to the king had probably always been motivated in some measure by the desire to limit him to actions becoming a god. —Edmund S. Morgan, Inventing the People: The Rise of Popular Sovereignty in England and America Oroonoko was no sooner return'd from his last Conquest, and receiv'd at Court … like a Deity, when there arriv'd in the Port an English Ship. —Aphra Behn, Oroonoko; or, The Royal Slave1 In her 1688 novel, Oroonoko; or, The Royal Slave, Aphra Behn writes of an African divine-right prince and his wife, Imoinda, who die as insurrectionists instead of living as slaves in English colonial Surinam. These characters' heroic lives and tragic deaths have led readers to study Oroonoko's transoceanic dynamics between a contested, divine-right monarchy in Stuart England and the development of chattel, racial slavery in its colonies. The consensus on this aspect of the novel remains best summarized by Laura Brown's 1987 insight that \"both Charles I and Oroonoko are victims of the same historical phenomenon—those new forces in English society loosely associated with an antiabsolutist mercantile imperialism.\"2 Charles I and Oroonoko are similar, that is, because they are overthrown by anti-monarchical proponents of England's commercial empire. This consensus arises from scholars' appraisal of Oroonoko's execution by English slavocrats at the end of the novel, which bears unmistakable likeness to the regicide of 1649. Abrupt and brutal, this scene is the fulcrum on which critical attention to sovereignty, [End Page 639] slavery, and race in Oroonoko turns.3 Scholars' focus on the execution is noteworthy because, while spectacular, the event occupies just three paragraphs of the story. By contrast, the slave rebellion in Oroonoko—which also dramatizes the relation of sovereignty, slavery, and race—is typically noticed only in passing.4 And yet: this rebellion consumes the attention of Oroonoko's narrator and directs the novel's plot. Imoinda's justification for the rebellion, a moral claim in herself against sovereign and slaveholding tyranny, coordinates the novel's dual episodes in Coramantien and Surinam. Both the rebellion and its suppression are framed by a racializing vocabulary through which Africans, regardless of social rank, are animalized into chattels along the color line. Imoinda, consort to the Coramantee heir apparent Oroonoko, rebels to stop her family's chattelization by the English; in turn, the English retrench in the colony by animalizing Oroonoko. The rebellion's nuances disclose the power dynamics of sovereignty, slavery, and race in much greater detail than can be understood through Oroonoko's execution alone. This essay's fundamental claim is that the slave rebellion in Oroonoko is a comprehensive study of how anti-tyrannicism, exemplified by Imoinda, collapses under the evolving colonial p","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907210
Christopher Stuart
"Who Could say now with What Passion?"Reimagining Henry James and "The Beast in the Jungle" Christopher Stuart In her widely influential book Epistemology of the Closet (1990) Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick imagines Henry James as a thoroughly repressed, self-blind Edwardian bachelor whose unconscious efforts to disguise his homosexual desires are precisely what reveal them in his fiction, at least to the contemporary reader willing to look beyond the dominant culture's pervasive homophobia. Examining one of James's best-known stories, "The Beast in the Jungle" (1903), Sedgwick discovers a meaningful pattern of "perephrasis and preterition" necessitated, she claims, by an Edwardian culture so universally and suffocatingly homophobic as to render same-sex desire "Unspeakable."1 Where most earlier interpreters accepted the story's ending as sincere––John Marcher collapsing in despair over his discovery that he should have loved May Bartram––Sedgwick interprets the final paragraphs' emphatic rhetoric as the starkest example of James's capitulation to compulsory heterosexuality. This interpretation has gained such wide acceptance that, as Michael Anesko recently put it, the story has come to seem "a virtual parable about closeted queer identity."2 Of course, Sedgwick's work did much more to redirect the current of James studies than merely establish a new standard reading of a single canonical story. Her deconstructive method for revealing taboo desires within the gaps and ellipses of James's works unleashed a torrent of critical reevaluation, ensuring that James studies would never again be contained within the conventional channels carved out by mid-20th-century scholars. As readers of Mark Twain's Life on the Mississippi (1883) know, however, such powerful streams are unpredictable and treacherous creatures. They erode and reshape their own banks, hide deadly snags, and, in the case of tidal bores, they can even reverse course suddenly and flow upstream. This last is something like what has happened with Sedgwick's account of James and the "The [End Page 827] Beast in the Jungle." Although her argument relied upon little biographical evidence beyond the broad assertion that James "made erotic choices that were complicated enough" to make him "an emboldening figure for a literary discussion of male homosexual panic," the critical outpouring her thesis unleashed developed a natural tributary of biographical investigation exploring the precise nature of James's relationships with other men.3 The work of James biographers like Paul Fisher and Michael Gorra, and especially the continued archival investigations of Anesko, have provided James scholars with a more detailed and nuanced picture of James and his queer milieu at the turn of the century. The portrait that emerges from their work points back to what Leon Edel already more than implied in his revised 1985 biography, which is that by the time James composed "The Beast in the Jungle" in the autumn of 1902
“谁能说出现在的激情是什么?”在她影响广泛的著作《衣橱认识论》(1990)中，伊芙·科索夫斯基·塞奇威克把亨利·詹姆斯想象成一个完全压抑的、自盲的爱德华时代的单身汉，他无意识地掩饰自己的同性恋欲望，正是他的小说中所揭示的，至少对那些愿意超越主流文化普遍存在的同性恋恐惧症的当代读者来说是这样。在研究詹姆斯最著名的小说之一《丛林中的野兽》(The Beast in The Jungle, 1903)时，塞奇威克发现了一种有意义的“渗透和偏见”模式，她声称，爱德华时代的文化是如此普遍和令人窒息的恐同，以至于同性恋欲望“难以言喻”。1大多数早期的解读者都认为故事的结局是真诚的——约翰·马彻发现自己本应该爱上梅·巴特拉姆，绝望地崩溃了——塞奇威克把最后几段强调的修辞解释为詹姆斯向强制性异性恋投降的最明显的例子。这种解释获得了如此广泛的接受，正如迈克尔·安内斯科(Michael Anesko)最近所说，这个故事似乎成了“一个关于未公开的酷儿身份的虚拟寓言”。当然，塞奇威克的工作在改变詹姆斯研究的方向方面做得更多，而不仅仅是为一个经典故事建立了一种新的标准阅读。她在詹姆斯作品的空白和省略中揭示禁忌欲望的解构方法引发了批判性重新评估的洪流，确保詹姆斯研究永远不会再被局限在20世纪中期学者开辟的传统渠道中。然而，正如马克·吐温的《密西西比河上的生活》(1883)的读者所知，如此强大的河流是不可预测和危险的生物。它们侵蚀并重塑了自己的河岸，隐藏着致命的障碍，在潮汐孔的情况下，它们甚至可以突然逆转方向，逆流而上。最后这一点有点像塞奇威克对詹姆斯和“丛林里的野兽”的描述。尽管她的论点几乎没有基于传记证据，只是宽泛地断言詹姆斯“做出了足够复杂的情爱选择”，使他成为“关于男性同性恋恐慌的文学讨论的大胆人物”，但她的论文所引发的批评性流露发展了一种自然的传记调查，探索了詹姆斯与其他男性关系的确切本质保罗·费希尔(Paul Fisher)和迈克尔·戈拉(Michael Gorra)等詹姆斯传记作家的作品，尤其是对阿内斯科(Anesko)的持续档案调查，为詹姆斯学者提供了一幅更详细、更细致的詹姆斯画像，以及他在世纪之交的酷儿环境。从他们的作品中浮现出来的形象，指向了莱昂·埃德尔在1985年修订的传记中已经暗示的东西，即詹姆斯在1902年秋天创作《丛林中的野兽》时，他可能意识到自己的同性恋倾向，并且正在努力在酷儿男网络中为自己建立一个位置。这个网络包括一些公开与伴侣生活在一起的人，还有一些像詹姆斯一样了解他们的人，他们的酷儿身份对任何人来说都不是秘密。也是在这些年里，詹姆斯与亨德里克·c·安德森(Hendrik C. Andersen)建立了一段基本上没有回报的关系，亨德里克·c·安德森是一位比他小30岁的美国雕塑家，他的性取向也同样模棱两可。虽然他们的关系似乎没有积极的性行为，但书信证据表明，他们的关系仍然是浪漫和充满激情的，尤其是对詹姆斯来说。对于那些接受塞奇威克论点的诠释者来说，詹姆斯的全部作品一下子变成了一个巨大的、尚未收获的文本领域，等待着奇怪的解码。在最近的学术研究中出现了一个更有性自我意识的詹姆斯的肖像，同样也承诺在后来的工作中提供新的解释领域。然而，收获它将需要更多的选择性和更仔细的历史和传记研究，因为尽管詹姆斯的任何作品都可能被声称是他潜意识的产物，但要表明他有意识地在故事或小说中表现了他的同性依恋的各个方面，就需要在小说和传记记录之间建立一个可信的联系。然而，我们有充分的理由认为，这样的调查将会取得成果。为…
{"title":"\"Who Could say now with What Passion?\": Reimagining Henry James and \"The Beast in the Jungle\"","authors":"Christopher Stuart","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907210","url":null,"abstract":"\"Who Could say now with What Passion?\"Reimagining Henry James and \"The Beast in the Jungle\" Christopher Stuart In her widely influential book Epistemology of the Closet (1990) Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick imagines Henry James as a thoroughly repressed, self-blind Edwardian bachelor whose unconscious efforts to disguise his homosexual desires are precisely what reveal them in his fiction, at least to the contemporary reader willing to look beyond the dominant culture's pervasive homophobia. Examining one of James's best-known stories, \"The Beast in the Jungle\" (1903), Sedgwick discovers a meaningful pattern of \"perephrasis and preterition\" necessitated, she claims, by an Edwardian culture so universally and suffocatingly homophobic as to render same-sex desire \"Unspeakable.\"1 Where most earlier interpreters accepted the story's ending as sincere––John Marcher collapsing in despair over his discovery that he should have loved May Bartram––Sedgwick interprets the final paragraphs' emphatic rhetoric as the starkest example of James's capitulation to compulsory heterosexuality. This interpretation has gained such wide acceptance that, as Michael Anesko recently put it, the story has come to seem \"a virtual parable about closeted queer identity.\"2 Of course, Sedgwick's work did much more to redirect the current of James studies than merely establish a new standard reading of a single canonical story. Her deconstructive method for revealing taboo desires within the gaps and ellipses of James's works unleashed a torrent of critical reevaluation, ensuring that James studies would never again be contained within the conventional channels carved out by mid-20th-century scholars. As readers of Mark Twain's Life on the Mississippi (1883) know, however, such powerful streams are unpredictable and treacherous creatures. They erode and reshape their own banks, hide deadly snags, and, in the case of tidal bores, they can even reverse course suddenly and flow upstream. This last is something like what has happened with Sedgwick's account of James and the \"The [End Page 827] Beast in the Jungle.\" Although her argument relied upon little biographical evidence beyond the broad assertion that James \"made erotic choices that were complicated enough\" to make him \"an emboldening figure for a literary discussion of male homosexual panic,\" the critical outpouring her thesis unleashed developed a natural tributary of biographical investigation exploring the precise nature of James's relationships with other men.3 The work of James biographers like Paul Fisher and Michael Gorra, and especially the continued archival investigations of Anesko, have provided James scholars with a more detailed and nuanced picture of James and his queer milieu at the turn of the century. The portrait that emerges from their work points back to what Leon Edel already more than implied in his revised 1985 biography, which is that by the time James composed \"The Beast in the Jungle\" in the autumn of 1902 ","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"332 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907209
Zoë Pollak
"Gardens of Decay"Decomposing Nature in Frederick Goddard Tuckerman's American Sonnets Zoë Pollak Yet in such waste, no waste the soul descries …For whoso waiteth, long & patiently,Will see a movement stirring at his feet —Frederick Goddard Tuckerman, Sonnet V:II1 i. wasted aesthetics One of the most gnomic moments in Ecclesiastes occurs at its end, when the book's final poem aligns the waning of life with a series of collapsing forms. Recall the Creator before your own frame fails, the speaker implores, foretelling the day when "the keepers of the house shall tremble" and "the daughters of musick shall be brought low," the "silver cord" will "be loosed" and the "golden bowl" will "be broken," and dust shall return to the earth.2 Within this catalogue of degeneration, Ecclesiastes presents an image of a grasshopper that "shall be a burden" as our "years draw nigh."3 What makes this grasshopper distressing to behold as we consider our mortality? Does its body pose an encumbrance to itself as it ages, or does its hardy exoskeleton and plague-worthy numbers underscore our human frailty by contrast? Over two thousand years after these lines were written, a Massachusetts poet steeped in Ecclesiastes invoked an equally enigmatic grasshopper to portray decline across species. In Frederick Goddard Tuckerman's Civil War-era sonnet, the speaker recalls his childhood "when, our schoolday done," he "hunted" for insects in late fall and found only the dregs of the season: "Tatter'd & dim, the last red butterfly" and "the old grasshopper molasses-mouth'd" (SP, III:IV, 120). Tuckerman's images, poignant in their ability to evoke color and sweetness amidst autumn's senescence, comprise the sonnet's final lines. But while they gesture toward ebbing, these last phrases are [End Page 799] disarmingly open-ended. The evocatively euphemistic "molasses-mouth'd" refers to survival: namely, to the brown regurgitations grasshoppers produce to defend themselves against predators. How many modernist or contemporary sonnets, let alone sonnets written in the nineteenth century, conclude abruptly on depictions of vomit? To end a sonnet on a subject as unpalatable as biological waste without providing readers with any kind of tempering allegorical framework was unprecedented in Tuckerman's day. Yet his five-part series, the first two of which he self-published in an 1860 volume called Poems, abounds with sonsnets that begin with metaphysical abstractions and psychic dilemmas and stop unexpectedly on images of effluvia, spoilage, and decay. One sonnet, for example, starts with the speaker recounting the way he walks along the shore to face the "restless phantoms of my restless mind," and leaves off with a description of a "desolate rock with lichen rusted over, / Hoar with salt sleet, & chalkings of the birds" (SP, III:X, 123). Another sonnet muses on how "old associations" between lovers "rarely slip," and ends suggestively on a masticated stem of grass "not to be put back, /
{"title":"\"Gardens of Decay\": Decomposing Nature in Frederick Goddard Tuckerman's American Sonnets","authors":"Zoë Pollak","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907209","url":null,"abstract":"\"Gardens of Decay\"Decomposing Nature in Frederick Goddard Tuckerman's American Sonnets Zoë Pollak Yet in such waste, no waste the soul descries …For whoso waiteth, long & patiently,Will see a movement stirring at his feet —Frederick Goddard Tuckerman, Sonnet V:II1 i. wasted aesthetics One of the most gnomic moments in Ecclesiastes occurs at its end, when the book's final poem aligns the waning of life with a series of collapsing forms. Recall the Creator before your own frame fails, the speaker implores, foretelling the day when \"the keepers of the house shall tremble\" and \"the daughters of musick shall be brought low,\" the \"silver cord\" will \"be loosed\" and the \"golden bowl\" will \"be broken,\" and dust shall return to the earth.2 Within this catalogue of degeneration, Ecclesiastes presents an image of a grasshopper that \"shall be a burden\" as our \"years draw nigh.\"3 What makes this grasshopper distressing to behold as we consider our mortality? Does its body pose an encumbrance to itself as it ages, or does its hardy exoskeleton and plague-worthy numbers underscore our human frailty by contrast? Over two thousand years after these lines were written, a Massachusetts poet steeped in Ecclesiastes invoked an equally enigmatic grasshopper to portray decline across species. In Frederick Goddard Tuckerman's Civil War-era sonnet, the speaker recalls his childhood \"when, our schoolday done,\" he \"hunted\" for insects in late fall and found only the dregs of the season: \"Tatter'd & dim, the last red butterfly\" and \"the old grasshopper molasses-mouth'd\" (SP, III:IV, 120). Tuckerman's images, poignant in their ability to evoke color and sweetness amidst autumn's senescence, comprise the sonnet's final lines. But while they gesture toward ebbing, these last phrases are [End Page 799] disarmingly open-ended. The evocatively euphemistic \"molasses-mouth'd\" refers to survival: namely, to the brown regurgitations grasshoppers produce to defend themselves against predators. How many modernist or contemporary sonnets, let alone sonnets written in the nineteenth century, conclude abruptly on depictions of vomit? To end a sonnet on a subject as unpalatable as biological waste without providing readers with any kind of tempering allegorical framework was unprecedented in Tuckerman's day. Yet his five-part series, the first two of which he self-published in an 1860 volume called Poems, abounds with sonsnets that begin with metaphysical abstractions and psychic dilemmas and stop unexpectedly on images of effluvia, spoilage, and decay. One sonnet, for example, starts with the speaker recounting the way he walks along the shore to face the \"restless phantoms of my restless mind,\" and leaves off with a description of a \"desolate rock with lichen rusted over, / Hoar with salt sleet, & chalkings of the birds\" (SP, III:X, 123). Another sonnet muses on how \"old associations\" between lovers \"rarely slip,\" and ends suggestively on a masticated stem of grass \"not to be put back, / ","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428602","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907206
Paul Davis
Addison's Classical Criticism and the Origins of Eighteenth-Century Aesthetics Paul Davis Joseph Addison's fame as a critic—like his literary reputation in general—rests on The Spectator. In particular, his series of Spectator papers on "The Pleasures of the Imagination" (June-July 1712) is widely recognised as marking the epochal transition from the author-centered neoclassical poetics of England's Augustan age to the new reader-centered, psychological mode of eighteenth-century aesthetics. But long before he became Mr. Spectator, during the first phase of his literary career as a scholar-poet at Oxford in the 1690s, Addison produced two substantial critical works about classical poets: "An Essay on the Georgics," prefixed to the translation of the poem in John Dryden's complete Works of Virgil (1697); and what I'll refer to as his "Notes on Ovid," notes Addison appended to his translations from Books II and III of the Metamorphoses published in the fifth instalment of Jacob Tonson's Poetical Miscellanies (1704). These works were much admired in Addison's lifetime and for generations afterwards: Samuel Johnson found in the Ovid notes "specimens of criticism sufficiently refined and subtle," while the "Essay" "set the terms for discussion of georgic poetry for over a century."1 Today, though, they are little known, even to specialists in the period. What scholarly discussion they have received has sought to establish how far they anticipate Addison's later aesthetic principles. However, all these existing accounts are marred to a greater or lesser extent by mistakes and misconceptions about Addison's early career carried over from nineteenth-century sources. The first half of this article corrects these errors, particularly regarding the composition dates of the two works and the order in which they were written. The date usually given for the "Essay" is 1693 and for the "Notes" 1697. Drawing on a wealth of hitherto unreported evidence, I show that these dates are back to front: in fact, Addison wrote the "Notes on Ovid" in 1693–94 and the "Essay on the Georgics" in 1696–97. In the second half of the article, I use that revised chronology to offer a new account of the place of Addison's classical criticism [End Page 693] in his personal development as a critic and the history of criticism more generally around the turn of the eighteenth century. The five years from 1693 to 1697, often dismissed as the juvenile or student stage of Addison's career by commentators for whom everything he wrote before The Spectator is mere prelude, were in fact a richly productive and pivotal period in Addison's writing life, his heyday as a classical scholar-poet. Before 1693, he was indeed a novice writer, with only a couple of neo-Latin panegyrics to his name; but by 1697 he had produced all but one of his major classical translations, which won the respect of Dryden, and the set of eight boldly innovative neo-Latin imitations of Virgil and Horace which made his n
{"title":"Addison's Classical Criticism and the Origins of Eighteenth-Century Aesthetics","authors":"Paul Davis","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907206","url":null,"abstract":"Addison's Classical Criticism and the Origins of Eighteenth-Century Aesthetics Paul Davis Joseph Addison's fame as a critic—like his literary reputation in general—rests on The Spectator. In particular, his series of Spectator papers on \"The Pleasures of the Imagination\" (June-July 1712) is widely recognised as marking the epochal transition from the author-centered neoclassical poetics of England's Augustan age to the new reader-centered, psychological mode of eighteenth-century aesthetics. But long before he became Mr. Spectator, during the first phase of his literary career as a scholar-poet at Oxford in the 1690s, Addison produced two substantial critical works about classical poets: \"An Essay on the Georgics,\" prefixed to the translation of the poem in John Dryden's complete Works of Virgil (1697); and what I'll refer to as his \"Notes on Ovid,\" notes Addison appended to his translations from Books II and III of the Metamorphoses published in the fifth instalment of Jacob Tonson's Poetical Miscellanies (1704). These works were much admired in Addison's lifetime and for generations afterwards: Samuel Johnson found in the Ovid notes \"specimens of criticism sufficiently refined and subtle,\" while the \"Essay\" \"set the terms for discussion of georgic poetry for over a century.\"1 Today, though, they are little known, even to specialists in the period. What scholarly discussion they have received has sought to establish how far they anticipate Addison's later aesthetic principles. However, all these existing accounts are marred to a greater or lesser extent by mistakes and misconceptions about Addison's early career carried over from nineteenth-century sources. The first half of this article corrects these errors, particularly regarding the composition dates of the two works and the order in which they were written. The date usually given for the \"Essay\" is 1693 and for the \"Notes\" 1697. Drawing on a wealth of hitherto unreported evidence, I show that these dates are back to front: in fact, Addison wrote the \"Notes on Ovid\" in 1693–94 and the \"Essay on the Georgics\" in 1696–97. In the second half of the article, I use that revised chronology to offer a new account of the place of Addison's classical criticism [End Page 693] in his personal development as a critic and the history of criticism more generally around the turn of the eighteenth century. The five years from 1693 to 1697, often dismissed as the juvenile or student stage of Addison's career by commentators for whom everything he wrote before The Spectator is mere prelude, were in fact a richly productive and pivotal period in Addison's writing life, his heyday as a classical scholar-poet. Before 1693, he was indeed a novice writer, with only a couple of neo-Latin panegyrics to his name; but by 1697 he had produced all but one of his major classical translations, which won the respect of Dryden, and the set of eight boldly innovative neo-Latin imitations of Virgil and Horace which made his n","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428606","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907211
Nicholas Smart
T. S. Eliot and the Problem of the Archive Nicholas Smart The final section of T. S. Eliot's early series "Goldfish (Essence of Summer Magazines)" has been read as the student poet packing away mementoes from his summer vacation before embarking on his year abroad in Paris: Among the débris of the yearOf which the autumn takes its toll: –Old letters, programmes, unpaid billsPhotographs, tennis shoes, and more,Ties, postal cards, the mass that fillsThe limbo of a bureau drawer –Of which October takes its tollAmong the débris of the yearI find this headed "Bacarolle." (iv, 1–9)1 In his recent study of the poems in the Inventions of the March Hare notebook, Jayme Stayer observes a key moment of personal transition at work here: "While the speaker sifts the contents of a bureau drawer, the poem registers a more existential cleaning out."2 The poem's phrasing catches us off guard; these are not items "on which the autumn takes its toll," as the idiom might lead us to assume, but "of which." The preposition strikes us as curious, working to complicate our understanding of these objects which now appear as a form of payment, facilitating the speaker's progression beyond "October" and into the next stage of life. In Charles Baudelaire's "Spleen," which Christopher Ricks offers as a precursor to this passage, the débris represents concealed information; the drawer "cache moins de secrets que mon triste cerveau."3 But Eliot makes it more ambiguous. In "Goldfish," the "limbo" is associated not only with the potential revelation of secrets, but with the uncertain ontological status of the objects themselves. The bureau drawer encompasses different frames of time; some items belong to the past, "Old letters, programmes," "photographs," and "postal cards," some may have future use, "unpaid bills," "tennis shoes," "ties," [End Page 851] and yet their collected presence in the drawer also situates them in a subjunctive space. As long as the drawer remains closed, the objects are positioned out of time, waiting for the opportunity to emerge from their transactional "limbo." The "limbo of the bureau drawer" is, for Eliot, a theoretical space, but for those who collected his "débris" it was a highly practical term. Informing Donald Gallup that he had acquired two letters from his brother in which he and Pound discussed whether to prefix The Waste Land with "Gerontion," Henry Eliot conceded that "EP's letter is so peppered with obscene phrases that it won't do for general exhibition."4 In his role as curator of the Eliot Collection then at Eliot House in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Henry looked for a way around: "TSE prohibited its inclusion in the Collection; but I think some kind of limbo might be instituted for such items."5 Since Eliot's death, many of his archives have been plagued by this kind of limbo, with scholars forced to wait out decades-long embargoes and restrictions imposed on access and quotation. In the initial gifting of copies and drafts of his work
{"title":"T. S. Eliot and the Problem of the Archive","authors":"Nicholas Smart","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907211","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907211","url":null,"abstract":"T. S. Eliot and the Problem of the Archive Nicholas Smart The final section of T. S. Eliot's early series \"Goldfish (Essence of Summer Magazines)\" has been read as the student poet packing away mementoes from his summer vacation before embarking on his year abroad in Paris: Among the débris of the yearOf which the autumn takes its toll: –Old letters, programmes, unpaid billsPhotographs, tennis shoes, and more,Ties, postal cards, the mass that fillsThe limbo of a bureau drawer –Of which October takes its tollAmong the débris of the yearI find this headed \"Bacarolle.\" (iv, 1–9)1 In his recent study of the poems in the Inventions of the March Hare notebook, Jayme Stayer observes a key moment of personal transition at work here: \"While the speaker sifts the contents of a bureau drawer, the poem registers a more existential cleaning out.\"2 The poem's phrasing catches us off guard; these are not items \"on which the autumn takes its toll,\" as the idiom might lead us to assume, but \"of which.\" The preposition strikes us as curious, working to complicate our understanding of these objects which now appear as a form of payment, facilitating the speaker's progression beyond \"October\" and into the next stage of life. In Charles Baudelaire's \"Spleen,\" which Christopher Ricks offers as a precursor to this passage, the débris represents concealed information; the drawer \"cache moins de secrets que mon triste cerveau.\"3 But Eliot makes it more ambiguous. In \"Goldfish,\" the \"limbo\" is associated not only with the potential revelation of secrets, but with the uncertain ontological status of the objects themselves. The bureau drawer encompasses different frames of time; some items belong to the past, \"Old letters, programmes,\" \"photographs,\" and \"postal cards,\" some may have future use, \"unpaid bills,\" \"tennis shoes,\" \"ties,\" [End Page 851] and yet their collected presence in the drawer also situates them in a subjunctive space. As long as the drawer remains closed, the objects are positioned out of time, waiting for the opportunity to emerge from their transactional \"limbo.\" The \"limbo of the bureau drawer\" is, for Eliot, a theoretical space, but for those who collected his \"débris\" it was a highly practical term. Informing Donald Gallup that he had acquired two letters from his brother in which he and Pound discussed whether to prefix The Waste Land with \"Gerontion,\" Henry Eliot conceded that \"EP's letter is so peppered with obscene phrases that it won't do for general exhibition.\"4 In his role as curator of the Eliot Collection then at Eliot House in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Henry looked for a way around: \"TSE prohibited its inclusion in the Collection; but I think some kind of limbo might be instituted for such items.\"5 Since Eliot's death, many of his archives have been plagued by this kind of limbo, with scholars forced to wait out decades-long embargoes and restrictions imposed on access and quotation. In the initial gifting of copies and drafts of his work","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428624","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907203
Catharine Gray
Print Elegies, Henry Vaughan, and the Everyday Deaths of War Catharine Gray Can you scale up grief? How do you mourn the ongoing, the escalating? While these kinds of questions about the scale and pace of mourning haunt many moments of historical crisis, including our own, they were particularly pressing for writers of the British Civil Wars faced with the proliferating mortality and bloody, youthful deaths of combat. These writers and their readers, living through waves of famine and disease, were accustomed to death, but the wars that shook England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales between 1638–51 put pressure on traditional cultures of mourning and literatures of grief, as the visibility of military men, framed as eminently grievable by honor codes and political polemic, collided with the sheer numbers and pace of deaths. This pace, which exacerbated already-existing mortality rates, was in turn compounded by the periodical print journalism that developed in large part to report the wars—their political divisions, as other scholars have long argued, but also their widespread material damage. If seventeenth-century news offered "an extreme example" of "information overload," as Joad Raymond recently suggests, then this overload took a particularly bellicose form, including information about war deaths whose fast-paced accumulations threatened to undercut the heroic singularity of martial exemplarity and raised questions about the relations of immediacy to historical commemoration, of accelerated cycles of news to fixity of meaning and consolation.1 This essay turns to a range of seventeenth-century published war elegies that struggle to mourn death, to keep up with the high mortality rates and their dissemination in the onslaught of events characterizing the war news of their moment. For some of these poets, producing broadside and pamphlet elegies in the midst of the wars, this struggle means adapting techniques of information management and journalistic formats to produce metonymies and congeries of combat mortality that make each death one in a repeatable series of current events. Others, such as Henry [End Page 609] Vaughan in his 1646 "An Elegie on the death of Mr. R. W.," play on the mixed media of memorialization—on tombs and monuments, whether of stone or paper—to develop emblems of poetic repetition and fleetingness, dailiness and decay. In doing so, all these elegists undercut the widespread understandings of elegy at the time as, as Andrea Brady puts it, building "paper monuments" that, outlasting the mere matter of bodies and marble memorials, offered durable memory of the dead alongside understanding and closure for the mourners.2 As they negotiate the tense relations between received understandings of elegy and new experiences and media, these multiple poets do not so much produce artifices of eternity as develop a presentist, even journalistic, poetic, as they use war deaths to index the everyday deaths of wartime and thus help figur
{"title":"Print Elegies, Henry Vaughan, and the Everyday Deaths of War","authors":"Catharine Gray","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907203","url":null,"abstract":"Print Elegies, Henry Vaughan, and the Everyday Deaths of War Catharine Gray Can you scale up grief? How do you mourn the ongoing, the escalating? While these kinds of questions about the scale and pace of mourning haunt many moments of historical crisis, including our own, they were particularly pressing for writers of the British Civil Wars faced with the proliferating mortality and bloody, youthful deaths of combat. These writers and their readers, living through waves of famine and disease, were accustomed to death, but the wars that shook England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales between 1638–51 put pressure on traditional cultures of mourning and literatures of grief, as the visibility of military men, framed as eminently grievable by honor codes and political polemic, collided with the sheer numbers and pace of deaths. This pace, which exacerbated already-existing mortality rates, was in turn compounded by the periodical print journalism that developed in large part to report the wars—their political divisions, as other scholars have long argued, but also their widespread material damage. If seventeenth-century news offered \"an extreme example\" of \"information overload,\" as Joad Raymond recently suggests, then this overload took a particularly bellicose form, including information about war deaths whose fast-paced accumulations threatened to undercut the heroic singularity of martial exemplarity and raised questions about the relations of immediacy to historical commemoration, of accelerated cycles of news to fixity of meaning and consolation.1 This essay turns to a range of seventeenth-century published war elegies that struggle to mourn death, to keep up with the high mortality rates and their dissemination in the onslaught of events characterizing the war news of their moment. For some of these poets, producing broadside and pamphlet elegies in the midst of the wars, this struggle means adapting techniques of information management and journalistic formats to produce metonymies and congeries of combat mortality that make each death one in a repeatable series of current events. Others, such as Henry [End Page 609] Vaughan in his 1646 \"An Elegie on the death of Mr. R. W.,\" play on the mixed media of memorialization—on tombs and monuments, whether of stone or paper—to develop emblems of poetic repetition and fleetingness, dailiness and decay. In doing so, all these elegists undercut the widespread understandings of elegy at the time as, as Andrea Brady puts it, building \"paper monuments\" that, outlasting the mere matter of bodies and marble memorials, offered durable memory of the dead alongside understanding and closure for the mourners.2 As they negotiate the tense relations between received understandings of elegy and new experiences and media, these multiple poets do not so much produce artifices of eternity as develop a presentist, even journalistic, poetic, as they use war deaths to index the everyday deaths of wartime and thus help figur","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428614","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907207
Eric Tyler Powell
Form, History, and the Politics of Lyric in Shelley's "ode to the west Wind" Eric Tyler Powell "In considering the political events of the day I endeavour to divest my mind of temporary sensations, to consider them as already historical. This is difficult." –Percy Bysshe Shelley1 Percy Bysshe Shelley's "Ode to the West Wind" has been simultaneously one of the most influential and controversial lyric poems in the English-language canon. It has often been taken as paradigmatic, not only of Shelley's "genius" and value as a poet, but of Romanticism and of lyric poetry as a genre.2 This reception history is coextensive with what M. H. Abrams called a "reorientation" of criticism—originating with the Romantics—inverting the traditional hierarchy of poetic genres inherited from Aristotle and elevating lyric poetry as the most essentially poetic of genres.3 In recent years, this reorientation has been powerfully and usefully reconsidered through the lens of historical poetics, in particular, the concepts of "lyricization" and "lyric reading," introduced by Virginia Jackson and Yopie Prins, through which the invention of the lyric as genre in the nineteenth century came to replace a variety of poetic forms and social functions.4 Shelley has continued to figure prominently in critical debates surrounding theories of lyric poetry, much as he figured prominently in such debates in his own time, and among the modernists and New Critics. The concept of lyric reading, I argue, is a powerful tool to reconsider Shelley's famous ode. The protocol of lyric reading is well-known: there is a speaker of the poem, who should not be confused with the poet; the dramatic situation of the speech act must be gleaned as context for interpretation and analysis; the poem itself should be the focus of interpretation, without considering the biography or intentions of the poet; historical context is only relevant insofar as it is "in" the poem itself. This conception of the lyric as a [End Page 723] single genre, with a defined set of rules for reading, hand in hand with expressivist theories of Romanticism, have led to a neglect of Shelley's own historical poetics as developed in his late works—in poetry and critical prose—and of the formal complexity of the "Ode to the West Wind" in particular.5 Foregrounding Shelley's historical poetics—the view that poetic forms have historical specificity and varying social functions as part of diverse cultures of circulation—is part of the burden of this essay. Part of what makes Shelley's Ode an interesting case for historical poetics, aside from its status as an exemplar of lyric, is that the poem is concerned with its own circulation. As an ultraradical in an era of extreme political reaction and censorship, Shelley was forced from the very start of his career as an author to consider questions of publication, circulation, and the materiality of text.6 The question of circulation is also central to contemporary debates about the lyric
{"title":"Form, History, and the Politics of Lyric in Shelley's \"ode to the west Wind\"","authors":"Eric Tyler Powell","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907207","url":null,"abstract":"Form, History, and the Politics of Lyric in Shelley's \"ode to the west Wind\" Eric Tyler Powell \"In considering the political events of the day I endeavour to divest my mind of temporary sensations, to consider them as already historical. This is difficult.\" –Percy Bysshe Shelley1 Percy Bysshe Shelley's \"Ode to the West Wind\" has been simultaneously one of the most influential and controversial lyric poems in the English-language canon. It has often been taken as paradigmatic, not only of Shelley's \"genius\" and value as a poet, but of Romanticism and of lyric poetry as a genre.2 This reception history is coextensive with what M. H. Abrams called a \"reorientation\" of criticism—originating with the Romantics—inverting the traditional hierarchy of poetic genres inherited from Aristotle and elevating lyric poetry as the most essentially poetic of genres.3 In recent years, this reorientation has been powerfully and usefully reconsidered through the lens of historical poetics, in particular, the concepts of \"lyricization\" and \"lyric reading,\" introduced by Virginia Jackson and Yopie Prins, through which the invention of the lyric as genre in the nineteenth century came to replace a variety of poetic forms and social functions.4 Shelley has continued to figure prominently in critical debates surrounding theories of lyric poetry, much as he figured prominently in such debates in his own time, and among the modernists and New Critics. The concept of lyric reading, I argue, is a powerful tool to reconsider Shelley's famous ode. The protocol of lyric reading is well-known: there is a speaker of the poem, who should not be confused with the poet; the dramatic situation of the speech act must be gleaned as context for interpretation and analysis; the poem itself should be the focus of interpretation, without considering the biography or intentions of the poet; historical context is only relevant insofar as it is \"in\" the poem itself. This conception of the lyric as a [End Page 723] single genre, with a defined set of rules for reading, hand in hand with expressivist theories of Romanticism, have led to a neglect of Shelley's own historical poetics as developed in his late works—in poetry and critical prose—and of the formal complexity of the \"Ode to the West Wind\" in particular.5 Foregrounding Shelley's historical poetics—the view that poetic forms have historical specificity and varying social functions as part of diverse cultures of circulation—is part of the burden of this essay. Part of what makes Shelley's Ode an interesting case for historical poetics, aside from its status as an exemplar of lyric, is that the poem is concerned with its own circulation. As an ultraradical in an era of extreme political reaction and censorship, Shelley was forced from the very start of his career as an author to consider questions of publication, circulation, and the materiality of text.6 The question of circulation is also central to contemporary debates about the lyric ","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"817 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428616","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-01DOI: 10.1353/elh.2023.a907205
Eve Houghton
Fops Vs TopsCharacter and Attention in the Country Wife Eve Houghton When Sparkish first appears on stage in William Wycherley's The Country Wife (1675), everyone expects a bad performance. According to his friends, Horner, Harcourt, and Dorilant, he is "one of those nauseous offerers at wit" whose attempts to be funny can immediately ruin the mood: "No, the rogue will not let us enjoy one another, but ravishes our conversation, though he signifies no more to't than Sir Martin Mar-all's gaping and awkward thrumming upon the lute does to his man's voice and music."1 The other men do not appreciate his belabored and unfunny jokes; in response to their silence, even Sparkish admits that "it does not move you, methinks" (1.1.356-357). On the one hand, this chilly reception from the other characters on stage confirms Harcourt's initial claim—that Sparkish does not "signifie," that he is a minor and ultimately irrelevant presence in the world of gentlemanly conversation. On the other hand, the staging of Sparkish's first appearance could give precisely the opposite impression, building excitement about the entrance of a character who was crucial to audience pleasure. After all, when the other men compare Sparkish to Sir Martin Mar-All, a bumbling and socially awkward aristocrat from John Dryden's popular 1667 comedy, they are encouraging Restoration audiences to associate him with a comic performance that was both conspicuously embarrassing and famously enjoyable.2 In that light, Horner's announcement that Sparkish is "the greatest fop, dullest ass and worst company, as you shall see" is a warning and an enticement, cueing Wycherley's audience to an impending social disaster: "for here he comes" (1.1.316-317). The scene's conflicting signals point us to the peculiar status of the fop on the Restoration stage, as a figure who reliably failed in his bids for recognition by other characters while capturing the interest and affections of the audience.3On the page they may seem merely laughable, but in performance, fops like Sparkish could upend and reconfigure the distribution of attention between minor parts and leading roles—or, as one Restoration commentator put it, between [End Page 667] fop characters and "Top Characters."4 In their tortured, tortuous, and often time-consuming bids for regard, they remind us that, as Jonathan Crary has shown, attention is both etymologically and conceptually linked to ideas of tension, stretching, and waiting.5 Fops frequently arrest or stretch the focus of the audience—by arriving at unexpected times, by straining against the norms of conduct shared by other characters, or by otherwise capturing audience interest and turning it in unexpected directions—and the performers who embodied them onstage possessed a similarly unpredictable force.6 How much and in what ways does Sparkish signify to the conversation between these men? For Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, in her influential queer reading of Wycherley's play, the answer i
当斯帕克什第一次出现在威廉·威切利的《乡下妻子》(1675)的舞台上时，每个人都认为这是一场糟糕的表演。据他的朋友霍纳(Horner)、哈考特(Harcourt)和多里兰特(Dorilant)说，他是“那种令人作呕的机智之人”，他试图搞笑会立即破坏气氛:“不，这个无赖不会让我们享受彼此的乐趣，而是让我们的谈话变得神往，尽管他并不比马丁·马尔爵士(Sir Martin Martin -all)张大嘴巴、笨拙地弹着鲁特琴破坏了他的声音和音乐。”其他男人不欣赏他那些冗长乏味的笑话;作为对他们沉默的回应，即使是Sparkish也承认“我认为它不会打动你”(1.1.356-357)。一方面，舞台上其他角色的冷淡态度证实了哈考特最初的说法——斯帕克什没有“象征意义”，他在绅士谈话的世界里是一个次要的、最终无关紧要的存在。另一方面，斯帕克什首次亮相的舞台可能会给人完全相反的印象，让人对一个对观众快乐至关重要的角色的出场感到兴奋。毕竟，当其他人将斯帕克什与约翰·德莱顿(John Dryden) 1667年的流行喜剧中的一个笨手笨脚、不善社交的贵族马丁·马尔-奥尔爵士(Sir Martin Martin - all)相比时，他们是在鼓励复辟时期的观众将他与一场既令人尴尬又令人愉快的喜剧表演联系起来从这个角度来看，霍纳宣称斯巴克什是“最伟大的花花公子，最愚蠢的傻瓜和最糟糕的伙伴，正如你将看到的”，这是一个警告和诱惑，预示着威切利的观众即将面临一场社会灾难:“因为他来了”(1.1.316-317)。这个场景中相互矛盾的信号向我们指出了这个人物在复辟时期舞台上的特殊地位，作为一个在吸引观众的兴趣和情感的同时，却无法得到其他角色的认可的人物。在纸面上，他们可能看起来只是可笑，但在表演中，像斯帕克什这样的顶级人物可以颠覆和重新配置次要角色和主角之间的注意力分配——或者，正如一位复辟时期的评论员所说，在顶级人物和“顶级人物”之间。在他们痛苦的、曲折的、往往耗费时间的争取关注的过程中，他们提醒我们，正如乔纳森·克拉里所表明的那样，注意力在词源上和概念上都与紧张、伸展和等待的概念联系在一起流行歌手经常通过在意想不到的时间出现，通过与其他角色共有的行为准则相违背，或者通过其他方式抓住观众的兴趣并将其转向意想不到的方向，来吸引或分散观众的注意力，而在舞台上体现他们的表演者也具有同样不可预测的力量Sparkish在这些人之间的对话中有多大的意义?对伊芙·科索夫斯基·塞奇威克(Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick)来说，在她对威切利的戏剧进行的有影响力的酷儿阅读中，答案是:在一个以才智为性货币和同性社会纽带的价值经济中，斯帕克什显然是失败者，灾难性地暴露了这种经济的优先级和效率他是一个有抱负的“机智”和花花公子，在时尚的社交圈里几乎不被容忍，包括霍纳(Horner)，一个为了逃避嫉妒丈夫的怀疑而假装无能的浪子，还有哈考特(Harcourt)，他爱上了斯帕克什的未婚妻阿利西亚(Alithea)。斯帕克什是如此渴望获得其他男人的认可——因为“我喜欢被人羡慕，不会娶一个只有我一个人能爱的妻子”——他没有试图干涉哈考特对她日益明目张胆的示好，也没能阻止他们最终订婚。塞奇威克认为，这一决议是对某些类型的失败的异性恋男子气概的否定和必要的放逐，这就是为什么阿利西娅和哈考特在一起，而不是在戏剧的最后和斯巴克什在一起。她认为斯帕克什是男性关系失败的一个警示范例，他天真地透明，在努力……
{"title":"Fops Vs Tops: Character and Attention in the Country Wife","authors":"Eve Houghton","doi":"10.1353/elh.2023.a907205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.2023.a907205","url":null,"abstract":"Fops Vs TopsCharacter and Attention in the Country Wife Eve Houghton When Sparkish first appears on stage in William Wycherley's The Country Wife (1675), everyone expects a bad performance. According to his friends, Horner, Harcourt, and Dorilant, he is \"one of those nauseous offerers at wit\" whose attempts to be funny can immediately ruin the mood: \"No, the rogue will not let us enjoy one another, but ravishes our conversation, though he signifies no more to't than Sir Martin Mar-all's gaping and awkward thrumming upon the lute does to his man's voice and music.\"1 The other men do not appreciate his belabored and unfunny jokes; in response to their silence, even Sparkish admits that \"it does not move you, methinks\" (1.1.356-357). On the one hand, this chilly reception from the other characters on stage confirms Harcourt's initial claim—that Sparkish does not \"signifie,\" that he is a minor and ultimately irrelevant presence in the world of gentlemanly conversation. On the other hand, the staging of Sparkish's first appearance could give precisely the opposite impression, building excitement about the entrance of a character who was crucial to audience pleasure. After all, when the other men compare Sparkish to Sir Martin Mar-All, a bumbling and socially awkward aristocrat from John Dryden's popular 1667 comedy, they are encouraging Restoration audiences to associate him with a comic performance that was both conspicuously embarrassing and famously enjoyable.2 In that light, Horner's announcement that Sparkish is \"the greatest fop, dullest ass and worst company, as you shall see\" is a warning and an enticement, cueing Wycherley's audience to an impending social disaster: \"for here he comes\" (1.1.316-317). The scene's conflicting signals point us to the peculiar status of the fop on the Restoration stage, as a figure who reliably failed in his bids for recognition by other characters while capturing the interest and affections of the audience.3On the page they may seem merely laughable, but in performance, fops like Sparkish could upend and reconfigure the distribution of attention between minor parts and leading roles—or, as one Restoration commentator put it, between [End Page 667] fop characters and \"Top Characters.\"4 In their tortured, tortuous, and often time-consuming bids for regard, they remind us that, as Jonathan Crary has shown, attention is both etymologically and conceptually linked to ideas of tension, stretching, and waiting.5 Fops frequently arrest or stretch the focus of the audience—by arriving at unexpected times, by straining against the norms of conduct shared by other characters, or by otherwise capturing audience interest and turning it in unexpected directions—and the performers who embodied them onstage possessed a similarly unpredictable force.6 How much and in what ways does Sparkish signify to the conversation between these men? For Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, in her influential queer reading of Wycherley's play, the answer i","PeriodicalId":46490,"journal":{"name":"ELH","volume":"134 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135428618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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：