Cross-Species Contagion in Beckett’s Endgame: A Posthumanist (Re)reading

IF 0.1 4区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
G. Alhasan, Dina Salman
{"title":"Cross-Species Contagion in Beckett’s Endgame: A Posthumanist (Re)reading","authors":"G. Alhasan, Dina Salman","doi":"10.1080/20512856.2021.1992819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper explores the intersection between posthumanism and ecological thought in Beckett’s Endgame. Based on a reception-informed approach, this article revisits Beckett’s Endgame with a special focus on how the recent context of pandemic affects our reading of the human in his work. Building on the existing body of critical response to Beckett’s re-evaluation of the human, we particularly contend that Beckett’s conception of the (post)human as a molecular being overcomes the humanist notion of human sovereignty and affirms, instead, continuity and relatedness of all lifeforms. We further want to argue that the metaphor of molecular (d)evolution evoked in Endgame undermines the unity of the self-contained subject and serves as a basis for an ethical response to the human and nonhuman other. To explicate this molecular vision, we examine how the play’s metaphorical engagement with cross-species contagion undermines humans’ claims to species exceptionalism and allows for inter-species connections. In this connection, we seek to align Beckett’s apocalypse in Endgame with Colebrook’s conception of the apocalypse as an ‘inhuman event,’ with ‘a sense of a certain mode of humanity reaching its end and giving way to other forms.’","PeriodicalId":40530,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language Literature and Culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language Literature and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20512856.2021.1992819","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper explores the intersection between posthumanism and ecological thought in Beckett’s Endgame. Based on a reception-informed approach, this article revisits Beckett’s Endgame with a special focus on how the recent context of pandemic affects our reading of the human in his work. Building on the existing body of critical response to Beckett’s re-evaluation of the human, we particularly contend that Beckett’s conception of the (post)human as a molecular being overcomes the humanist notion of human sovereignty and affirms, instead, continuity and relatedness of all lifeforms. We further want to argue that the metaphor of molecular (d)evolution evoked in Endgame undermines the unity of the self-contained subject and serves as a basis for an ethical response to the human and nonhuman other. To explicate this molecular vision, we examine how the play’s metaphorical engagement with cross-species contagion undermines humans’ claims to species exceptionalism and allows for inter-species connections. In this connection, we seek to align Beckett’s apocalypse in Endgame with Colebrook’s conception of the apocalypse as an ‘inhuman event,’ with ‘a sense of a certain mode of humanity reaching its end and giving way to other forms.’
贝克特《终局之战》中的跨物种传染:后人文主义解读
摘要本文探讨了贝克特《终局》中后人道主义与生态思想的交叉。基于接受知情的方法,本文重新审视了贝克特的《终局》,特别关注最近的疫情背景如何影响我们对他作品中人类的解读。在对贝克特重新评价人类的现有批判性回应的基础上,我们特别认为,贝克特将(后)人类视为一个分子存在的概念克服了人类主权的人道主义概念,反而肯定了所有生命形式的连续性和关联性。我们进一步认为,《终局之战》中唤起的分子(d)进化的隐喻破坏了独立主体的统一,并作为对人类和非人类他者的伦理回应的基础。为了解释这一分子视觉,我们研究了该剧对跨物种传染的隐喻性参与如何破坏人类对物种例外论的主张,并允许物种间的联系。在这方面,我们试图将贝克特在《终局之战》中的启示录与科尔布鲁克将启示录视为“非人道事件”的概念相结合,“某种人类模式达到了尽头,并让位于其他形式。”
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
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
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