The Inorganic Plant in the Romantic Garden

Natania Meeker, Antónia Szabari
{"title":"The Inorganic Plant in the Romantic Garden","authors":"Natania Meeker, Antónia Szabari","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvsf1qmm.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter approaches Romantic aesthetics through the “plant horror” of Edgar Allan Poe (1809–1849), who had an ambivalent relationship to Romantic vitalism, and studies the way in which his arabesque vegetality travels into the work of later writers, including Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860–1935). Poe’s foregrounding of the eighteenth-century notion of “the sentience of all vegetable things” in “The Fall of the House of Usher” (1839) both responds to and undermines Romantic ideas about human affinities with plants. In “Usher,” Poe follows the Enlightenment analogy of human to plant to its logical conclusion in order to expose its aporias; for him, vegetal sentience cannot be contained within any hierarchy of being. At the same time, Poe destroys the Romantic fusional model—in which humans and plants commune within a shared physical world—by focusing on the destructive and rapacious qualities of the vegetal. The transcendental ideas of beauty and the sublime give way in Poe to a vegetality that invades the human consciousness. He suggests that humans might be horrified, rather than delighted, by the calamity that a vegetal modernity represents, even though (and perhaps because) they have no alternative to it.","PeriodicalId":252707,"journal":{"name":"Radical Botany","volume":"411 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radical Botany","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvsf1qmm.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

Abstract

This chapter approaches Romantic aesthetics through the “plant horror” of Edgar Allan Poe (1809–1849), who had an ambivalent relationship to Romantic vitalism, and studies the way in which his arabesque vegetality travels into the work of later writers, including Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1860–1935). Poe’s foregrounding of the eighteenth-century notion of “the sentience of all vegetable things” in “The Fall of the House of Usher” (1839) both responds to and undermines Romantic ideas about human affinities with plants. In “Usher,” Poe follows the Enlightenment analogy of human to plant to its logical conclusion in order to expose its aporias; for him, vegetal sentience cannot be contained within any hierarchy of being. At the same time, Poe destroys the Romantic fusional model—in which humans and plants commune within a shared physical world—by focusing on the destructive and rapacious qualities of the vegetal. The transcendental ideas of beauty and the sublime give way in Poe to a vegetality that invades the human consciousness. He suggests that humans might be horrified, rather than delighted, by the calamity that a vegetal modernity represents, even though (and perhaps because) they have no alternative to it.
浪漫花园中的无机植物
本章通过埃德加·爱伦·坡(1809-1849)的“植物恐怖”来探讨浪漫主义美学,爱伦·坡与浪漫活力主义有着矛盾的关系,并研究了他的阿拉伯式植物主义如何进入后来的作家的作品,包括夏洛特·帕金斯·吉尔曼(1860-1935)。爱伦·坡在1839年的《厄舍屋的倒塌》(the Fall of the House of Usher)中突出了18世纪“所有植物的感知”这一概念,这既是对浪漫主义关于人类与植物亲缘关系的看法的回应,也是对其的破坏。在《厄榭》中,爱伦·坡遵循启蒙运动的类比,将人与植物类比到其逻辑结论,以揭露其漏洞;对他来说,植物的感知能力不能包含在任何存在的层次中。与此同时,坡通过关注植物的破坏性和贪婪性,摧毁了浪漫主义的融合模式——人类和植物在一个共同的物理世界中交流。在爱伦坡身上,关于美和崇高的超越性观念让位于一种侵入人类意识的植物性。他认为,人类可能会对植物现代性所代表的灾难感到恐惧,而不是高兴,尽管(也许是因为)他们别无选择。
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