Review

Pub Date : 2018-07-03 DOI:10.1080/15021866.2018.1550881
O. Gunn
{"title":"Review","authors":"O. Gunn","doi":"10.1080/15021866.2018.1550881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler: Philosophical Perspectives is a collection of new critical essays written by scholars working in drama and theater studies, European philosophy, literature and Scandinavian studies. Editor Kristin Gjesdal (Associate Professor of Philosophy at Temple University and Professor II at the University of Oslo) describes the volume as an “effort to overcome” the “intellectual provincialism” that has separated “philosophy and the other human sciences” (7). After reading a few chapters, I began to wonder: What makes this book philosophical? And what makes it particularly suited to surmounting disciplinary insularity? A literary scholar myself, I do not always recognize a manifest difference between the readings and perspectives collected here and other examples of criticism on Hedda Gabler written from literary or performance studies perspectives. I do not claim expertise or the skill to identify what is, and what is not, philosophical—quite the opposite. Thus, I found myself somewhat set adrift and unconvinced concerning claims about the “long overdue” nature of “such a volume” (Gjesdal 7). Nonetheless, I find the question itself interesting, and it continued to pester me as I read. Thus, I will use it to motivate and organize this review, zooming in on two essays that can exemplify articulation of a strong connection between Hedda Gabler and specific philosophical concepts or texts, and identifying a few answers— whether satisfying or no. But before I turn my attention to these individual essays, I will introduce Gjesdal’s broader claims for the philosophical approach, presented in her Editor’s Introduction. She chooses","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15021866.2018.1550881","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15021866.2018.1550881","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler: Philosophical Perspectives is a collection of new critical essays written by scholars working in drama and theater studies, European philosophy, literature and Scandinavian studies. Editor Kristin Gjesdal (Associate Professor of Philosophy at Temple University and Professor II at the University of Oslo) describes the volume as an “effort to overcome” the “intellectual provincialism” that has separated “philosophy and the other human sciences” (7). After reading a few chapters, I began to wonder: What makes this book philosophical? And what makes it particularly suited to surmounting disciplinary insularity? A literary scholar myself, I do not always recognize a manifest difference between the readings and perspectives collected here and other examples of criticism on Hedda Gabler written from literary or performance studies perspectives. I do not claim expertise or the skill to identify what is, and what is not, philosophical—quite the opposite. Thus, I found myself somewhat set adrift and unconvinced concerning claims about the “long overdue” nature of “such a volume” (Gjesdal 7). Nonetheless, I find the question itself interesting, and it continued to pester me as I read. Thus, I will use it to motivate and organize this review, zooming in on two essays that can exemplify articulation of a strong connection between Hedda Gabler and specific philosophical concepts or texts, and identifying a few answers— whether satisfying or no. But before I turn my attention to these individual essays, I will introduce Gjesdal’s broader claims for the philosophical approach, presented in her Editor’s Introduction. She chooses
分享
查看原文
审查
易卜生的《海达·盖博勒:哲学视角》是由戏剧和戏剧研究、欧洲哲学、文学和斯堪的纳维亚研究领域的学者撰写的新评论性文章的合集。编辑Kristin Gjesdal(天普大学哲学副教授和奥斯陆大学II教授)将这本书描述为“努力克服”将“哲学和其他人文科学”分开的“知识分子的地方主义”(7)。在阅读了几章之后,我开始思考:是什么使这本书具有哲学意义?是什么让它特别适合于超越学科的狭隘性?作为一名文学学者,我并不总是认为这里收集的阅读材料和观点与其他从文学或表演研究角度写的关于海达·盖博勒的批评有明显的区别。我并不是说我有专业知识或技能来辨别什么是哲学,什么不是哲学——恰恰相反。因此,对于“这样一本书”的“姗姗来迟”性质的说法(Gjesdal 7),我发现自己有些茫然和不相信。尽管如此,我发现这个问题本身很有趣,在我阅读的过程中,它继续困扰着我。因此,我将用它来激励和组织这篇评论,放大两篇文章,这两篇文章可以举例说明Hedda Gabler与特定哲学概念或文本之间的紧密联系,并确定一些答案-无论满意与否。但在我将注意力转向这些单独的文章之前,我将介绍Gjesdal对哲学方法的更广泛主张,在她的编辑导言中提出。她选择
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
×
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