"Those for Whom This Civilization Has No Place": Reading Eugenics in Of Mice and Men

IF 0.9 0 LITERATURE, AMERICAN
Vincent. Benlloch
{"title":"\"Those for Whom This Civilization Has No Place\": Reading Eugenics in Of Mice and Men","authors":"Vincent. Benlloch","doi":"10.5325/STEINBECKREVIEW.16.1.0074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Despite the prevalence of eugenics and determinist race-thinking during much of Steinbeck's working life, few critics have attempted to trace the echoes of that lineage in his work. Working within an interdiscplinary paradigm, I wish to argue that one of Steinbeck's oft-read and oft-analyzed novellas, Of Mice and Men, ought to be analyzed within the eugenic milieu of early twentieth-century America. Borrowing widely from intellectual history, philosophy, critical race theory, and labor studies, I present three distinct analytical channels for excavating the presence and activity of eugenic thinking in the novella. The first channel is a cosmological reading of the striking similarities between Steinbeck's non-teleological philosophy of \"visceral understanding\" and the worldview advanced by eugenicists–cum–political theorists Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard. The second is a micro-historical focus on California's role as a frontier for the institutionalization and practice of eugenics, a context that allows one to redefine some of Of Mice and Men's own narrative moments and structural relationships as marked by eugenic considerations and ethics. The third channel is a \"geosophical\" interpretation of the construction of the hobo archetype—which Lenny and George both fall under—in order to elucidate how hoboes and tramps become eugenically translated, a process of coding and identification of the unfit that signals to a coextensive precarity and revolutionary potential that \"strange\" and mobile persons embody within racially constituted spaces. In sum, much of my argument can be understood as turning around the effects and consequences of what would it mean to consider Of Mice and Men a eugenic novel in some sense.","PeriodicalId":40417,"journal":{"name":"Steinbeck Review","volume":"16 1","pages":"74 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Steinbeck Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/STEINBECKREVIEW.16.1.0074","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, AMERICAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:Despite the prevalence of eugenics and determinist race-thinking during much of Steinbeck's working life, few critics have attempted to trace the echoes of that lineage in his work. Working within an interdiscplinary paradigm, I wish to argue that one of Steinbeck's oft-read and oft-analyzed novellas, Of Mice and Men, ought to be analyzed within the eugenic milieu of early twentieth-century America. Borrowing widely from intellectual history, philosophy, critical race theory, and labor studies, I present three distinct analytical channels for excavating the presence and activity of eugenic thinking in the novella. The first channel is a cosmological reading of the striking similarities between Steinbeck's non-teleological philosophy of "visceral understanding" and the worldview advanced by eugenicists–cum–political theorists Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard. The second is a micro-historical focus on California's role as a frontier for the institutionalization and practice of eugenics, a context that allows one to redefine some of Of Mice and Men's own narrative moments and structural relationships as marked by eugenic considerations and ethics. The third channel is a "geosophical" interpretation of the construction of the hobo archetype—which Lenny and George both fall under—in order to elucidate how hoboes and tramps become eugenically translated, a process of coding and identification of the unfit that signals to a coextensive precarity and revolutionary potential that "strange" and mobile persons embody within racially constituted spaces. In sum, much of my argument can be understood as turning around the effects and consequences of what would it mean to consider Of Mice and Men a eugenic novel in some sense.
“这个文明没有立足之地的人”:读《人与鼠的优生学》
摘要:尽管优生学和决定论种族思想在斯坦贝克的大部分工作生涯中盛行,但很少有评论家试图在他的作品中追踪这种血统的回声。在一个跨学科的范例中,我想说,斯坦贝克经常被阅读和分析的中篇小说之一,《人鼠之间》,应该在20世纪早期美国的优生环境中进行分析。广泛借鉴思想史、哲学、批判种族理论和劳动研究,我提出了三种不同的分析渠道来挖掘中篇小说中优生思想的存在和活动。第一个渠道是对斯坦贝克“本能理解”的非目的论哲学与优生学家兼政治理论家麦迪逊·格兰特和洛斯罗普·斯托达德提出的世界观之间惊人的相似之处的宇宙学解读。第二部分是微观历史的焦点,关注加州作为优生学制度化和实践的前沿角色,在这种背景下,人们可以重新定义《鼠与人》中一些以优生学考虑和伦理为标志的叙事时刻和结构关系。第三个渠道是对流浪汉原型构建的“地球物理学”解释——连尼和乔治都属于这种解释——为了阐明流浪汉和流浪汉是如何被优生翻译的,这是一个编码和识别不适合的过程,它标志着“陌生的”和流动的人在种族构成的空间中体现的共同的不稳定性和革命潜力。总而言之,我的大部分论点可以被理解为在某种意义上将《人鼠之间》视为优生小说的影响和后果。
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
Steinbeck Review
Steinbeck Review LITERATURE, AMERICAN-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Steinbeck Review is an authorized publication on the life and works of American novelist John Steinbeck (1902–1968). It publishes scholarly articles; notes; book and performance reviews; creative writing; original artwork; and short intercalary pieces offering fresh perspectives, including notes on contemporary references to Steinbeck, discussions of the contexts of his work, and an occasional poem. Steinbeck Review has a threefold mission of broadening the scope of Steinbeck criticism, promoting the work of new and established scholars, and serving as a resource for Steinbeck teachers at all levels.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信