{"title":"卡文迪什","authors":"N. Allsopp","doi":"10.2307/j.ctt211qz4d.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 3 challenges the conventional understanding of Margaret Cavendish as a royalist, by focusing on her less-studied works of the early 1650s, when absolutist arguments were being pressed (by Davenant and others) in service of more flexible forms of allegiance. The chapter maps and contextualizes Cavendish’s common ground with Hobbes, but especially the suggestively close relationship between her political writings and those of her husband, Newcastle. It compares the critique of cavalier tropes in Cavendish’s poetry with Marvell’s, before moving on to unravel the complex political theory of Cavendish’s first essay collection, The Worlds Olio. Cavendish takes a highly artificial view of sovereignty as a psychological phenomenon stimulated by the sensory experience of ceremony. This belief exists in complex tension with a more ruthlessly defactoist view of sovereignty based on coercive force.","PeriodicalId":306177,"journal":{"name":"Poetry and Sovereignty in the English Revolution","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cavendish\",\"authors\":\"N. Allsopp\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctt211qz4d.7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 3 challenges the conventional understanding of Margaret Cavendish as a royalist, by focusing on her less-studied works of the early 1650s, when absolutist arguments were being pressed (by Davenant and others) in service of more flexible forms of allegiance. The chapter maps and contextualizes Cavendish’s common ground with Hobbes, but especially the suggestively close relationship between her political writings and those of her husband, Newcastle. It compares the critique of cavalier tropes in Cavendish’s poetry with Marvell’s, before moving on to unravel the complex political theory of Cavendish’s first essay collection, The Worlds Olio. Cavendish takes a highly artificial view of sovereignty as a psychological phenomenon stimulated by the sensory experience of ceremony. This belief exists in complex tension with a more ruthlessly defactoist view of sovereignty based on coercive force.\",\"PeriodicalId\":306177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Poetry and Sovereignty in the English Revolution\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Poetry and Sovereignty in the English Revolution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt211qz4d.7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poetry and Sovereignty in the English Revolution","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt211qz4d.7","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

第三章挑战了人们对玛格丽特·卡文迪什是保皇派的传统认识,重点关注了她在1650年代早期的一些研究较少的作品,当时专制主义的论点(由达文南特和其他人)被施压,以服务于更灵活的效忠形式。这一章描绘了卡文迪什与霍布斯的共同点,并将其置于背景中,尤其是她的政治著作与她丈夫纽卡斯尔的政治著作之间暗示性的密切关系。它比较了对卡文迪什诗歌中骑士修辞的批评和马维尔的批评,然后继续揭示卡文迪什的第一部散文集《世界奥利奥》中复杂的政治理论。卡文迪什将主权视为一种由仪式的感官体验所激发的心理现象,这是一种高度人为的观点。这种信念存在于一种复杂的紧张关系中,它带有一种基于强制力的更为无情的破坏主义主权观。
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
Cavendish
Chapter 3 challenges the conventional understanding of Margaret Cavendish as a royalist, by focusing on her less-studied works of the early 1650s, when absolutist arguments were being pressed (by Davenant and others) in service of more flexible forms of allegiance. The chapter maps and contextualizes Cavendish’s common ground with Hobbes, but especially the suggestively close relationship between her political writings and those of her husband, Newcastle. It compares the critique of cavalier tropes in Cavendish’s poetry with Marvell’s, before moving on to unravel the complex political theory of Cavendish’s first essay collection, The Worlds Olio. Cavendish takes a highly artificial view of sovereignty as a psychological phenomenon stimulated by the sensory experience of ceremony. This belief exists in complex tension with a more ruthlessly defactoist view of sovereignty based on coercive force.
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
Conclusion Cavendish
×
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