Literary Studies and Collective Life

IF 0.8 2区文学 0 LITERATURE

New Literary History Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.1353/nlh.2022.a898326

C. Levine

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Literary studies has repeatedly justified a diciplinary focus on the small scale. Both our most conventional objects—the novel and the lyric poem—and our most conventional methods—close reading, historical analysis, and an attention to surprises and exceptions—lead us away from a focus on large scales of collective life. This essay argues for a different starting point, making a case for a metadisciplinary formalism that can join literary studies and many other fields in the work of responding to global poverty and climate change. Reading Henry Mayhew and Rodrigo Nunes, Levine makes a case for the hinge as a crucial aesthetic and political form.

查看原文本刊更多论文

文学研究与集体生活

摘要:文学研究一再证明了对小规模学科的关注。我们最传统的对象——小说和抒情诗——和我们最传统的方法——细读、历史分析以及对意外和例外的关注——都把我们带离了对集体生活大尺度的关注。这篇文章提出了一个不同的起点，提出了一个可以将文学研究和许多其他领域加入到应对全球贫困和气候变化工作中的元学科形式主义的案例。在阅读亨利·梅休和罗德里戈·努涅斯的作品时，莱文认为铰链是一种至关重要的美学和政治形式。

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

New Literary History LITERATURE-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

11.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： New Literary History focuses on questions of theory, method, interpretation, and literary history. Rather than espousing a single ideology or intellectual framework, it canvasses a wide range of scholarly concerns. By examining the bases of criticism, the journal provokes debate on the relations between literary and cultural texts and present needs. A major international forum for scholarly exchange, New Literary History has received six awards from the Council of Editors of Learned Journals.