默认设置

Leonard Diepeveen
{"title":"默认设置","authors":"Leonard Diepeveen","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198825432.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 takes on methodological issues arising from the manner in which fraud discourse entered culture. It considers the place of ordinary intellectuals, and fraud discourse’s large presence in daily and weekly journalism, including the aesthetic principles that could be invoked but did not need to be argued for. It considers how this default aesthetic worked when it was at rest, comfortably interacting with works that responded well to its modes of analysis. It then turns to this aesthetic when it was under stress, dealing with modernist works that resisted its forms of analysis. The chapter then considers modernist criticism’s irritations with the standard criticism of the time, and to the place of evidence in early twentieth-century aesthetic argument. It ends with the function of journalism’s gestures of refusal to engage with modernism, and the functions of jokes and doggerel in that refusal.","PeriodicalId":170510,"journal":{"name":"Modernist Fraud","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Default Settings\",\"authors\":\"Leonard Diepeveen\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198825432.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 2 takes on methodological issues arising from the manner in which fraud discourse entered culture. It considers the place of ordinary intellectuals, and fraud discourse’s large presence in daily and weekly journalism, including the aesthetic principles that could be invoked but did not need to be argued for. It considers how this default aesthetic worked when it was at rest, comfortably interacting with works that responded well to its modes of analysis. It then turns to this aesthetic when it was under stress, dealing with modernist works that resisted its forms of analysis. The chapter then considers modernist criticism’s irritations with the standard criticism of the time, and to the place of evidence in early twentieth-century aesthetic argument. It ends with the function of journalism’s gestures of refusal to engage with modernism, and the functions of jokes and doggerel in that refusal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Modernist Fraud\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Modernist Fraud\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198825432.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modernist Fraud","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198825432.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

第二章讨论了欺诈话语进入文化的方式所引起的方法论问题。它考虑了普通知识分子的地位,以及欺诈话语在日常和每周新闻中的大量存在,包括可以援引但不需要争论的美学原则。它考虑了这种默认美学在休息时是如何工作的,与那些对其分析模式反应良好的作品舒适地互动。然后,当它受到压力时,它转向这种美学,处理抵制其分析形式的现代主义作品。然后,本章考虑了现代主义批评对当时标准批评的不满,并在20世纪早期的美学论证中找到了证据。它以新闻业拒绝与现代主义接触的姿态的功能,以及笑话和打油诗在这种拒绝中的功能结束。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Default Settings
Chapter 2 takes on methodological issues arising from the manner in which fraud discourse entered culture. It considers the place of ordinary intellectuals, and fraud discourse’s large presence in daily and weekly journalism, including the aesthetic principles that could be invoked but did not need to be argued for. It considers how this default aesthetic worked when it was at rest, comfortably interacting with works that responded well to its modes of analysis. It then turns to this aesthetic when it was under stress, dealing with modernist works that resisted its forms of analysis. The chapter then considers modernist criticism’s irritations with the standard criticism of the time, and to the place of evidence in early twentieth-century aesthetic argument. It ends with the function of journalism’s gestures of refusal to engage with modernism, and the functions of jokes and doggerel in that refusal.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sincerity’s Champions Modern Parody Rereading the Shameless Puffery of Modern Charlatans Default Settings Intent in Practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1