哥特式漂流雷蒙德》和《阿瑟-卡瓦纳》的案例

IF 0.2 N/A HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Gothic Studies Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.3366/gothic.2024.0184
Manuel Aguirre
{"title":"哥特式漂流雷蒙德》和《阿瑟-卡瓦纳》的案例","authors":"Manuel Aguirre","doi":"10.3366/gothic.2024.0184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two opposed views of the history of Gothic fiction claim that a) the genre went into decline and ‘died’ in the early nineteenth century, and b) it has gone from strength to strength into the twenty-first century. This article defends a third hypothesis: that Gothic neither died nor endured but transformed into other genres to which the term ‘Gothic’ can apply analogically at best. Leaning on formal criteria (the codes or compositional conventions of eighteenth-century Gothic) it then offers a comparison between two short narratives thirty-three years apart, which, while being essentially ‘the same’ text, yet can be shown to belong to different genres. The article then projects the notion of language drift onto literary evolution to suggest that a form of genre drift accounts for this seeming oddity.","PeriodicalId":42443,"journal":{"name":"Gothic Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gothic Drift: The Case of ‘Raymond’ and ‘Arthur Kavanagh’\",\"authors\":\"Manuel Aguirre\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/gothic.2024.0184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two opposed views of the history of Gothic fiction claim that a) the genre went into decline and ‘died’ in the early nineteenth century, and b) it has gone from strength to strength into the twenty-first century. This article defends a third hypothesis: that Gothic neither died nor endured but transformed into other genres to which the term ‘Gothic’ can apply analogically at best. Leaning on formal criteria (the codes or compositional conventions of eighteenth-century Gothic) it then offers a comparison between two short narratives thirty-three years apart, which, while being essentially ‘the same’ text, yet can be shown to belong to different genres. The article then projects the notion of language drift onto literary evolution to suggest that a form of genre drift accounts for this seeming oddity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42443,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gothic Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gothic Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/gothic.2024.0184\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gothic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/gothic.2024.0184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于哥特小说的历史,有两种截然相反的观点:a) 该流派在 19 世纪初走向衰落并 "消亡";b) 该流派在 21 世纪愈演愈烈。本文为第三种假设辩护:哥特小说既没有消亡,也没有延续,而是转变成了其他流派,"哥特 "一词充其量只能类比适用于这些流派。文章以形式标准(十八世纪哥特式的规范或创作惯例)为依据,比较了两部相隔三十三年的短篇叙事作品,虽然它们本质上是 "相同 "的文本,但可以证明它们属于不同的流派。然后,文章将语言漂移的概念投射到文学演变中,认为流派漂移的形式可以解释这种看似奇怪的现象。
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
Gothic Drift: The Case of ‘Raymond’ and ‘Arthur Kavanagh’
Two opposed views of the history of Gothic fiction claim that a) the genre went into decline and ‘died’ in the early nineteenth century, and b) it has gone from strength to strength into the twenty-first century. This article defends a third hypothesis: that Gothic neither died nor endured but transformed into other genres to which the term ‘Gothic’ can apply analogically at best. Leaning on formal criteria (the codes or compositional conventions of eighteenth-century Gothic) it then offers a comparison between two short narratives thirty-three years apart, which, while being essentially ‘the same’ text, yet can be shown to belong to different genres. The article then projects the notion of language drift onto literary evolution to suggest that a form of genre drift accounts for this seeming oddity.
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
Gothic Studies
Gothic Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: The official journal of the International Gothic Association considers the field of Gothic studies from the eighteenth century to the present day. Gothic Studies opens a forum for dialogue and cultural criticism, and provides a specialist journal for scholars working in a field which is today taught or researched in academic institutions around the globe. The journal invites contributions from scholars working within any period of the Gothic; interdisciplinary scholarship is especially welcome, as are studies of works across the range of media, beyond the written word.
期刊最新文献
‘A Melmoth? a cosmopolitan? a patriot?’: Melmoth the Wanderer's Russian Epigones ‘Endless circumlocutions’: Speaking To and Away from the Point Before and After Melmoth the Wanderer Melmoth Irreconcilable? Supersessionism and Jewish and Christian Responses to the Wandering Jew Legend From Melmoth to Maqroll: The Wanderer in Latin America Melmoth and the Irish Gothic Tradition
×
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