{"title":"理智与情感与精神分析:简·奥斯汀与克里斯特文的符号学","authors":"Marina Cano","doi":"10.1080/10436928.2022.2100669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent scholarship has brought late twentiethand early twenty-first-century critical theory to bear upon Jane Austen. Sydney Miller and Devoney Looser read Austen and her afterlife alongside Susan Sontag’s essay “Notes on ‘Camp’” (1964). They agree that modern Austen mash-ups and kitsch reproductions reveal the “campiness,” or sheer frivolity, of the Austen originals, as theorized by Sontag. Matthew Taylor (“Beholding the Beholder’s Eye”; “Sensibility’s Double Take”), in turn, applies generative anthropology and mimetic theory to the novels, in particular René Girard’s premise of “two audiences,” while my own work has read Austen and her afterlife through theories of performance and performativity, such as Judith Butler’s, and through Jack Halberstam’s notion of gaga feminism (Cano, “Austen and Shakespeare”; Jane Austen and Performance; “Jane Goes Gaga”). Such a growing trend has begun to complement more traditional, and still prevalent, historicist approaches to Austen, allowing us to see Austen anew by highlighting little-noticed aspects of her fiction (camp sensibility, mimetic tendencies, the absence of an original “performance”). Yet what remains largely missing among these various theoretical enquiries is a psychoanalytic reading of the novels that investigates the unconscious of the text and the existential challenges it poses to writer, characters, and readers. In this essay, I bring Austen’s first published novel, Sense and Sensibility, into conversation with French linguist and psychoanalyst Julia Kristeva, one of Sontag’s and Girard’s contemporaries and still a prominent and prolific figure in the Western intellectual landscape. Not surprising, given the novel’s rootedness in eighteenth-century notions of sentimentality, most studies of Sense and Sensibility have been historically inflected. Marvin Mudrick’s now classic assessment, Jane Austen: Irony as Defense and Discovery, regards Sense and Sensibility as a condemnation of excessive feeling and a parody of the novel of sensibility, as its title suggests already (62, 90). Another classic, Deidre Lynch’s The Economy of Character, reads the Dashwood sisters in relation to the flowering commercial modernity","PeriodicalId":42717,"journal":{"name":"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory","volume":"33 1","pages":"174 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sense and Sensibility and Psychoanalysis: Jane Austen and the Kristevan Semiotic\",\"authors\":\"Marina Cano\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10436928.2022.2100669\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent scholarship has brought late twentiethand early twenty-first-century critical theory to bear upon Jane Austen. Sydney Miller and Devoney Looser read Austen and her afterlife alongside Susan Sontag’s essay “Notes on ‘Camp’” (1964). They agree that modern Austen mash-ups and kitsch reproductions reveal the “campiness,” or sheer frivolity, of the Austen originals, as theorized by Sontag. Matthew Taylor (“Beholding the Beholder’s Eye”; “Sensibility’s Double Take”), in turn, applies generative anthropology and mimetic theory to the novels, in particular René Girard’s premise of “two audiences,” while my own work has read Austen and her afterlife through theories of performance and performativity, such as Judith Butler’s, and through Jack Halberstam’s notion of gaga feminism (Cano, “Austen and Shakespeare”; Jane Austen and Performance; “Jane Goes Gaga”). Such a growing trend has begun to complement more traditional, and still prevalent, historicist approaches to Austen, allowing us to see Austen anew by highlighting little-noticed aspects of her fiction (camp sensibility, mimetic tendencies, the absence of an original “performance”). Yet what remains largely missing among these various theoretical enquiries is a psychoanalytic reading of the novels that investigates the unconscious of the text and the existential challenges it poses to writer, characters, and readers. In this essay, I bring Austen’s first published novel, Sense and Sensibility, into conversation with French linguist and psychoanalyst Julia Kristeva, one of Sontag’s and Girard’s contemporaries and still a prominent and prolific figure in the Western intellectual landscape. Not surprising, given the novel’s rootedness in eighteenth-century notions of sentimentality, most studies of Sense and Sensibility have been historically inflected. Marvin Mudrick’s now classic assessment, Jane Austen: Irony as Defense and Discovery, regards Sense and Sensibility as a condemnation of excessive feeling and a parody of the novel of sensibility, as its title suggests already (62, 90). Another classic, Deidre Lynch’s The Economy of Character, reads the Dashwood sisters in relation to the flowering commercial modernity\",\"PeriodicalId\":42717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"174 - 195\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10436928.2022.2100669\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10436928.2022.2100669","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
最近的学术研究使二十世纪末二十一世纪初的批判理论对简·奥斯汀产生了影响。西德尼·米勒(Sydney Miller)和德文尼·卢瑟(Devoney Looser)阅读了奥斯汀和她的来生,以及苏珊·桑塔格(Susan Sontag)的文章《营地笔记》(1964)。他们一致认为,现代奥斯汀的混搭和媚俗的复制品揭示了桑塔格所说的奥斯汀原作的“做作”或纯粹的轻浮。马修·泰勒(Matthew Taylor)(《注视着年长者的眼睛》(Beholding the Beholder’s Eye);《情感的双重接受》(Sensibility’s Double Take,并通过杰克·哈尔伯斯塔姆的gaga女权主义概念(卡诺,《奥斯汀与莎士比亚》;简·奥斯汀与表演;《简去嘎嘎》)。这种日益增长的趋势已经开始补充对奥斯汀更传统、仍然流行的历史主义方法,使我们能够通过突出她小说中鲜为人知的方面(营地情感、模仿倾向、缺乏原创“表演”)来重新审视奥斯汀。然而,在这些不同的理论探索中,仍然缺少的是对小说的精神分析阅读,它调查了文本的无意识及其对作家、人物和读者构成的生存挑战。在这篇文章中,我将奥斯汀出版的第一部小说《理智与情感》与法国语言学家和精神分析学家朱莉娅·克里斯特娃进行了对话,她是桑塔格和吉拉德的同时代人之一,仍然是西方知识界杰出而多产的人物。毫不奇怪,考虑到这部小说植根于18世纪的多愁善感观念,大多数对《理智与情感》的研究都受到了历史的影响。马文·穆德里克(Marvin Mudrick)现在的经典评价《简·奥斯汀:作为防御和发现的讽刺》(Jane Austen:Irony as Defense and Discovery)将《理智与情感》(Sense and Sensibility)视为对过度情感的谴责和对情感小说的模仿,正如其标题所暗示的那样(62,90)。另一部经典作品,黛德丽·林奇的《性格的经济》,解读了达什伍德姐妹与繁荣的商业现代性的关系
Sense and Sensibility and Psychoanalysis: Jane Austen and the Kristevan Semiotic
Recent scholarship has brought late twentiethand early twenty-first-century critical theory to bear upon Jane Austen. Sydney Miller and Devoney Looser read Austen and her afterlife alongside Susan Sontag’s essay “Notes on ‘Camp’” (1964). They agree that modern Austen mash-ups and kitsch reproductions reveal the “campiness,” or sheer frivolity, of the Austen originals, as theorized by Sontag. Matthew Taylor (“Beholding the Beholder’s Eye”; “Sensibility’s Double Take”), in turn, applies generative anthropology and mimetic theory to the novels, in particular René Girard’s premise of “two audiences,” while my own work has read Austen and her afterlife through theories of performance and performativity, such as Judith Butler’s, and through Jack Halberstam’s notion of gaga feminism (Cano, “Austen and Shakespeare”; Jane Austen and Performance; “Jane Goes Gaga”). Such a growing trend has begun to complement more traditional, and still prevalent, historicist approaches to Austen, allowing us to see Austen anew by highlighting little-noticed aspects of her fiction (camp sensibility, mimetic tendencies, the absence of an original “performance”). Yet what remains largely missing among these various theoretical enquiries is a psychoanalytic reading of the novels that investigates the unconscious of the text and the existential challenges it poses to writer, characters, and readers. In this essay, I bring Austen’s first published novel, Sense and Sensibility, into conversation with French linguist and psychoanalyst Julia Kristeva, one of Sontag’s and Girard’s contemporaries and still a prominent and prolific figure in the Western intellectual landscape. Not surprising, given the novel’s rootedness in eighteenth-century notions of sentimentality, most studies of Sense and Sensibility have been historically inflected. Marvin Mudrick’s now classic assessment, Jane Austen: Irony as Defense and Discovery, regards Sense and Sensibility as a condemnation of excessive feeling and a parody of the novel of sensibility, as its title suggests already (62, 90). Another classic, Deidre Lynch’s The Economy of Character, reads the Dashwood sisters in relation to the flowering commercial modernity