How to Read the Literary Market: An Introduction

D. Breitenwischer, Philipp Löffler, Johannes Völz
{"title":"How to Read the Literary Market: An Introduction","authors":"D. Breitenwischer, Philipp Löffler, Johannes Völz","doi":"10.1515/zaa-2020-2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Understood as amodern institution, literature is historically bound to the extension of market rationality. The commodification of literature since the late eighteenth century has changed the ways in which we handle literary works: rather than just perused by individual readers, books are promoted, traded, consumed, and legally protected. Over the past three decades, scholars have focused increased attention on how to conceptualize this encroachment of market principles into the sphere of culture (Agnew 1986; Bourdieu 1996; Woodmansee 1994). They have shown that concepts like ‘the fine arts’, ‘high literature’, and ‘aesthetic autonomy’ have evolved not in opposition but rather as historical responses to and functions of the commercialization and professionalization of culture. In so doing they have reflected upon an array of intersecting cultural developments such as the specialization of the poet as professional writer and distributor of a marketable commodity and the diversification of literary practice across artistic and commercial spaces. What conjoins these projects is thebroad questionof how to read the literarymarket. Many approaches toward literary market economies have pursued the aim of identifying the absent causes that determine literary production and consumption. This objective informed the works of marketplace critics of the 1980s (e.g., Gilmore 1985; Michaels 1987) but has also inspired the bulk of the more recent “New Economic Criticism” (e.g., McClanahan 2016; Poovey 2008). These branches of revisionist scholarship revolve around the social and economic, the material and ideological implications and constraints conditioning the production, reception, and distribution of literature. They emphasize literature’s crucial function as a site of political resistance and complicity, albeit by positing a rather static causality between the social and the cultural, politics and literature. A number of competing contemporary approaches stemming from the resurgence of the sociology of literature have provided alternatives to the premises","PeriodicalId":293840,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2020-2025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Understood as amodern institution, literature is historically bound to the extension of market rationality. The commodification of literature since the late eighteenth century has changed the ways in which we handle literary works: rather than just perused by individual readers, books are promoted, traded, consumed, and legally protected. Over the past three decades, scholars have focused increased attention on how to conceptualize this encroachment of market principles into the sphere of culture (Agnew 1986; Bourdieu 1996; Woodmansee 1994). They have shown that concepts like ‘the fine arts’, ‘high literature’, and ‘aesthetic autonomy’ have evolved not in opposition but rather as historical responses to and functions of the commercialization and professionalization of culture. In so doing they have reflected upon an array of intersecting cultural developments such as the specialization of the poet as professional writer and distributor of a marketable commodity and the diversification of literary practice across artistic and commercial spaces. What conjoins these projects is thebroad questionof how to read the literarymarket. Many approaches toward literary market economies have pursued the aim of identifying the absent causes that determine literary production and consumption. This objective informed the works of marketplace critics of the 1980s (e.g., Gilmore 1985; Michaels 1987) but has also inspired the bulk of the more recent “New Economic Criticism” (e.g., McClanahan 2016; Poovey 2008). These branches of revisionist scholarship revolve around the social and economic, the material and ideological implications and constraints conditioning the production, reception, and distribution of literature. They emphasize literature’s crucial function as a site of political resistance and complicity, albeit by positing a rather static causality between the social and the cultural, politics and literature. A number of competing contemporary approaches stemming from the resurgence of the sociology of literature have provided alternatives to the premises
如何解读文学市场:导论
作为一种现代制度,文学在历史上被束缚于市场理性的延伸。自18世纪后期以来,文学的商品化改变了我们处理文学作品的方式:书籍不仅仅是由个人读者阅读,而是被推广、交易、消费和法律保护。在过去的三十年里,学者们越来越关注如何将市场原则对文化领域的侵蚀概念化(Agnew 1986;布迪厄1996;Woodmansee 1994)。他们已经表明,像“美术”、“高雅文学”和“审美自主”这样的概念的发展不是对立的,而是作为对文化商业化和专业化的历史反应和功能。在这样做的过程中,他们反思了一系列交叉的文化发展,比如诗人作为专业作家和市场商品分销商的专业化,以及跨越艺术和商业空间的文学实践的多样化。将这些项目联系在一起的是一个广泛的问题,即如何解读文学市场。许多研究文学市场经济的方法都追求找出决定文学生产和消费的缺席原因的目标。这一目标影响了20世纪80年代市场批评家的作品(例如,Gilmore 1985;Michaels 1987),但也启发了最近的大部分“新经济批评”(例如,McClanahan 2016;Poovey 2008)。修正主义学术的这些分支围绕着社会和经济、物质和意识形态的影响以及制约文学作品生产、接受和发行的制约因素展开。他们强调文学的关键功能,作为政治抵抗和共谋的场所,尽管在社会和文化,政治和文学之间建立了一种静态的因果关系。由于文学社会学的复兴,一些相互竞争的当代方法为这一前提提供了替代方案
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信