{"title":"现代早期英国文学中的种族与情感(Carol Mejia LaPerle主编)","authors":"Christina Kolias","doi":"10.1353/cjm.2023.a912698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature ed. by Carol Mejia LaPerle Christina Kolias Carol Mejia LaPerle, ed., Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature (Tempe: ACMRS Press, 2022), vii + 221 pp., 4 ills. Carol Mejia LaPerle’s Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature is a welcome and noteworthy contribution to the Premodern Critical Race Studies (PCRS) field, as it is the first collection to discuss race’s direct relationship to affect theory in early modernity. In recent years, there has been an increase in interest and resistance to the rich history of PCRS scholarship, which seeks to question the supposed universality of early modern canonical literature. La-Perle’s collection embodies a similar task, where the past contributes to present understandings of racial formation and race-making. What sets this collection apart is each scholar’s personal connection and racial investment in exposing white supremacy and its affective relations in early modern texts and culture. Each contributor, through their means of rhetorical resistance and reckoning, proves that affect is a powerful lens to investigate race. Considering “affect is persistent proof of a body’s never less than ongoing immersion in and among the world’s obstinacies and rhythms, its refusals as much as its invitations” (Gregory J. Seigworth and Melissa Gregg, “An Inventory of Shimmers,” in The Affect Theory Reader, ed. Melissa Gregg and Gregory J. Seigworth [Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010], 1), every chapter in this collection highlights not just the stark anti-Blackness of the period and its preservation of racist ideologies and categorizations but race’s many passionate affects that inform (un)belonging. Tracking the nuances of affect displays its variability as a verb and noun, where affect is expressive through thoughts (internal) and actions (external). Even LaPerle’s introductory reference to critical works by W. E. B. Du Bois, Fred Moten, and Calvin L. Warren draws attention to the collection’s focus on one retrospective question—how does race feel? The importance of feelings and passions in affect studies highlights the imbrication of externalized disgust and difference internalized by racialized subjects. Even though the collection analyzes early modernity’s attempts at dominance and disempowerment, the authors in this collection, as LaPerle notes, capture the spirit [End Page 250] of bell hooks’s “oppositional gaze.” Each contributor’s use of hooks’s gesture as methodology not only lays a foundation for the change they desire in the field but also, most importantly, illustrates the interplay between criticism and activism. The collection contains three equally balanced sections, each applying intersectional and/or cross-disciplinary lenses committed to uncovering racializing regimes and the importance of feeling race as evidenced in early modern literature and culture. The editor skillfully assembles a first-class group of contributors, including Margo Hendricks, whose foreword contextualizes the collection as a “next gen PCRS” (vii) project. As respected specialists in the field, these contributors provide intuitive readings that draw attention to a new vocabulary of affective distortion, where race is feeling and feeling is race because external stimuli affect interiority and vice versa. The first section critically analyzes how the language of early modern texts constructs racialized groups to be demonized, desired, disgusting, and/or feared. Ambereen Dadabhoy begins with a powerful yet personal opening chapter discussing Philip Massinger’s The Renegado and how it exposes a tradition of Islamophobia in what Dadabhoy calls the “staged Mediterranean,” as well as its relation to Mary Louise Pratt’s concept of the “contact zone.” Her chapter highlights the exclusionary traumas and affects early modern narratives carry when readers and scholars, like Dadabhoy herself, embody non-English, non-white, and non-European identities—identities, furthermore, that are classified as targets of imperial and xenophobic ambitions on page and stage. Mira ‘Assaf Kafantaris plays a pivotal role in thinking of affect as a similar means of control. She furthers themes of foreign contamination and infection in the canon and the risks they pose to white futurity. Similar to Dadabhoy’s exploration of race and beauty, Kafantaris’s analysis of Edmund Spenser’s linguistic warfare on Duessa’s foreign and disgusting queenship—compared to Una’s sentimental image of white Protestant virtue...","PeriodicalId":53903,"journal":{"name":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature ed. by Carol Mejia LaPerle (review)\",\"authors\":\"Christina Kolias\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/cjm.2023.a912698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reviewed by: Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature ed. by Carol Mejia LaPerle Christina Kolias Carol Mejia LaPerle, ed., Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature (Tempe: ACMRS Press, 2022), vii + 221 pp., 4 ills. Carol Mejia LaPerle’s Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature is a welcome and noteworthy contribution to the Premodern Critical Race Studies (PCRS) field, as it is the first collection to discuss race’s direct relationship to affect theory in early modernity. In recent years, there has been an increase in interest and resistance to the rich history of PCRS scholarship, which seeks to question the supposed universality of early modern canonical literature. La-Perle’s collection embodies a similar task, where the past contributes to present understandings of racial formation and race-making. What sets this collection apart is each scholar’s personal connection and racial investment in exposing white supremacy and its affective relations in early modern texts and culture. Each contributor, through their means of rhetorical resistance and reckoning, proves that affect is a powerful lens to investigate race. Considering “affect is persistent proof of a body’s never less than ongoing immersion in and among the world’s obstinacies and rhythms, its refusals as much as its invitations” (Gregory J. Seigworth and Melissa Gregg, “An Inventory of Shimmers,” in The Affect Theory Reader, ed. Melissa Gregg and Gregory J. Seigworth [Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010], 1), every chapter in this collection highlights not just the stark anti-Blackness of the period and its preservation of racist ideologies and categorizations but race’s many passionate affects that inform (un)belonging. Tracking the nuances of affect displays its variability as a verb and noun, where affect is expressive through thoughts (internal) and actions (external). Even LaPerle’s introductory reference to critical works by W. E. B. Du Bois, Fred Moten, and Calvin L. Warren draws attention to the collection’s focus on one retrospective question—how does race feel? The importance of feelings and passions in affect studies highlights the imbrication of externalized disgust and difference internalized by racialized subjects. Even though the collection analyzes early modernity’s attempts at dominance and disempowerment, the authors in this collection, as LaPerle notes, capture the spirit [End Page 250] of bell hooks’s “oppositional gaze.” Each contributor’s use of hooks’s gesture as methodology not only lays a foundation for the change they desire in the field but also, most importantly, illustrates the interplay between criticism and activism. The collection contains three equally balanced sections, each applying intersectional and/or cross-disciplinary lenses committed to uncovering racializing regimes and the importance of feeling race as evidenced in early modern literature and culture. The editor skillfully assembles a first-class group of contributors, including Margo Hendricks, whose foreword contextualizes the collection as a “next gen PCRS” (vii) project. As respected specialists in the field, these contributors provide intuitive readings that draw attention to a new vocabulary of affective distortion, where race is feeling and feeling is race because external stimuli affect interiority and vice versa. The first section critically analyzes how the language of early modern texts constructs racialized groups to be demonized, desired, disgusting, and/or feared. Ambereen Dadabhoy begins with a powerful yet personal opening chapter discussing Philip Massinger’s The Renegado and how it exposes a tradition of Islamophobia in what Dadabhoy calls the “staged Mediterranean,” as well as its relation to Mary Louise Pratt’s concept of the “contact zone.” Her chapter highlights the exclusionary traumas and affects early modern narratives carry when readers and scholars, like Dadabhoy herself, embody non-English, non-white, and non-European identities—identities, furthermore, that are classified as targets of imperial and xenophobic ambitions on page and stage. Mira ‘Assaf Kafantaris plays a pivotal role in thinking of affect as a similar means of control. She furthers themes of foreign contamination and infection in the canon and the risks they pose to white futurity. Similar to Dadabhoy’s exploration of race and beauty, Kafantaris’s analysis of Edmund Spenser’s linguistic warfare on Duessa’s foreign and disgusting queenship—compared to Una’s sentimental image of white Protestant virtue...\",\"PeriodicalId\":53903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/cjm.2023.a912698\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cjm.2023.a912698","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
克里斯蒂娜·科利亚斯·卡罗尔·梅贾·拉珀勒编辑,《早期现代英国文学中的种族与情感》(坦佩:ACMRS出版社,2022),vii + 221页,4病。Carol Mejia LaPerle的《早期现代英语文学中的种族与情感》是对前现代批判种族研究(PCRS)领域的一项受欢迎且值得注意的贡献,因为它是第一本讨论早期现代性中种族与情感理论直接关系的文集。近年来,对PCRS学术的丰富历史的兴趣和抵制有所增加,该学术试图质疑早期现代经典文学的假定普遍性。拉-珀尔的藏品体现了类似的任务,过去有助于现在对种族形成和种族形成的理解。这本书的与众不同之处在于,每位学者在揭示白人至上主义及其在早期现代文本和文化中的情感关系方面的个人联系和种族投入。每一位作者,通过他们的修辞抵抗和思考,都证明了情感是研究种族的一个强有力的镜头。考虑到“情感是身体持续不断地沉浸在世界的固执和节奏之中的持续证据,它的拒绝和它的邀请一样多”(Gregory J. Seigworth和Melissa Gregg,“闪烁的盘点”,在情感理论读者中,Melissa Gregg和Gregory J. Seigworth[达勒姆,北卡罗来纳州:杜克大学出版社(Duke University Press, 2010), 1),这本书的每一章都不仅强调了那个时期鲜明的反黑人主义及其对种族主义意识形态和分类的保留,还强调了种族的许多激情影响,这些影响告知(不)归属。追踪情感的细微差别显示了其作为动词和名词的可变性,其中情感通过思想(内部)和行为(外部)表达。甚至拉珀勒在介绍杜波依斯、弗雷德·莫滕和卡尔文·l·沃伦的重要作品时,也把人们的注意力吸引到了这个系列对一个回顾性问题的关注上——种族的感觉如何?情感和激情在情感研究中的重要性凸显了被种族化的被试的外化厌恶和内化差异的相互交织。尽管这本合集分析了早期现代性对统治和剥夺权力的尝试,但正如拉珀勒所指出的那样,这本合集的作者抓住了贝尔·胡克斯“对立的目光”的精神。每个贡献者使用hooks的姿态作为方法论,不仅为他们在该领域所希望的变化奠定了基础,而且最重要的是,说明了批评与行动主义之间的相互作用。该系列包含三个平衡的部分,每个部分都采用交叉和/或跨学科的视角,致力于揭示种族化政权和早期现代文学和文化中所证明的种族感受的重要性。编辑巧妙地召集了一批一流的撰稿人,其中包括马戈·亨德里克斯(Margo Hendricks),他的前言将该系列描述为“下一代pcr”(vii)项目。作为该领域受人尊敬的专家,这些作者提供了直观的解读,引起了人们对情感扭曲新词汇的关注,其中种族是感觉,感觉是种族,因为外部刺激影响内在,反之亦然。第一部分批判性地分析了早期现代文本的语言如何构建种族化的群体,使其被妖魔化、被渴望、被厌恶和/或被恐惧。Ambereen Dadabhoy以一个有力而又个人的开篇章节开始,讨论了菲利普·马辛格(Philip Massinger)的《叛变者》(The Renegado),以及它如何在Dadabhoy所谓的“上演的地中海”中暴露出一种伊斯兰恐惧症的传统,以及它与玛丽·路易斯·普拉特(Mary Louise Pratt)的“接触区”概念的关系。她的章节强调了排斥性的创伤,并影响了早期现代叙事,当读者和学者,像达达布霍伊自己一样,体现了非英国人、非白人和非欧洲人的身份——此外,这些身份在页面和舞台上被归类为帝国主义和仇外野心的目标。Mira ' Assaf Kafantaris在将情感视为一种类似的控制手段方面发挥了关键作用。她进一步阐述了在经典中外来污染和感染的主题,以及它们对白人未来构成的风险。与达达布霍伊对种族与美的探索类似,卡法塔里斯对埃德蒙·斯宾塞对杜莎的外国和令人厌恶的皇后身份的语言战的分析——与尤娜对白人新教美德的感怀形象相比……
Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature ed. by Carol Mejia LaPerle (review)
Reviewed by: Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature ed. by Carol Mejia LaPerle Christina Kolias Carol Mejia LaPerle, ed., Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature (Tempe: ACMRS Press, 2022), vii + 221 pp., 4 ills. Carol Mejia LaPerle’s Race and Affect in Early Modern English Literature is a welcome and noteworthy contribution to the Premodern Critical Race Studies (PCRS) field, as it is the first collection to discuss race’s direct relationship to affect theory in early modernity. In recent years, there has been an increase in interest and resistance to the rich history of PCRS scholarship, which seeks to question the supposed universality of early modern canonical literature. La-Perle’s collection embodies a similar task, where the past contributes to present understandings of racial formation and race-making. What sets this collection apart is each scholar’s personal connection and racial investment in exposing white supremacy and its affective relations in early modern texts and culture. Each contributor, through their means of rhetorical resistance and reckoning, proves that affect is a powerful lens to investigate race. Considering “affect is persistent proof of a body’s never less than ongoing immersion in and among the world’s obstinacies and rhythms, its refusals as much as its invitations” (Gregory J. Seigworth and Melissa Gregg, “An Inventory of Shimmers,” in The Affect Theory Reader, ed. Melissa Gregg and Gregory J. Seigworth [Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010], 1), every chapter in this collection highlights not just the stark anti-Blackness of the period and its preservation of racist ideologies and categorizations but race’s many passionate affects that inform (un)belonging. Tracking the nuances of affect displays its variability as a verb and noun, where affect is expressive through thoughts (internal) and actions (external). Even LaPerle’s introductory reference to critical works by W. E. B. Du Bois, Fred Moten, and Calvin L. Warren draws attention to the collection’s focus on one retrospective question—how does race feel? The importance of feelings and passions in affect studies highlights the imbrication of externalized disgust and difference internalized by racialized subjects. Even though the collection analyzes early modernity’s attempts at dominance and disempowerment, the authors in this collection, as LaPerle notes, capture the spirit [End Page 250] of bell hooks’s “oppositional gaze.” Each contributor’s use of hooks’s gesture as methodology not only lays a foundation for the change they desire in the field but also, most importantly, illustrates the interplay between criticism and activism. The collection contains three equally balanced sections, each applying intersectional and/or cross-disciplinary lenses committed to uncovering racializing regimes and the importance of feeling race as evidenced in early modern literature and culture. The editor skillfully assembles a first-class group of contributors, including Margo Hendricks, whose foreword contextualizes the collection as a “next gen PCRS” (vii) project. As respected specialists in the field, these contributors provide intuitive readings that draw attention to a new vocabulary of affective distortion, where race is feeling and feeling is race because external stimuli affect interiority and vice versa. The first section critically analyzes how the language of early modern texts constructs racialized groups to be demonized, desired, disgusting, and/or feared. Ambereen Dadabhoy begins with a powerful yet personal opening chapter discussing Philip Massinger’s The Renegado and how it exposes a tradition of Islamophobia in what Dadabhoy calls the “staged Mediterranean,” as well as its relation to Mary Louise Pratt’s concept of the “contact zone.” Her chapter highlights the exclusionary traumas and affects early modern narratives carry when readers and scholars, like Dadabhoy herself, embody non-English, non-white, and non-European identities—identities, furthermore, that are classified as targets of imperial and xenophobic ambitions on page and stage. Mira ‘Assaf Kafantaris plays a pivotal role in thinking of affect as a similar means of control. She furthers themes of foreign contamination and infection in the canon and the risks they pose to white futurity. Similar to Dadabhoy’s exploration of race and beauty, Kafantaris’s analysis of Edmund Spenser’s linguistic warfare on Duessa’s foreign and disgusting queenship—compared to Una’s sentimental image of white Protestant virtue...
期刊介绍:
Comitatus: A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies publishes articles by graduate students and recent PhDs in any field of medieval and Renaissance studies. The journal maintains a tradition of gathering work from across disciplines, with a special interest in articles that have an interdisciplinary or cross-cultural scope.