Literary Bioethics: Animality, Disability, and the Human by Maren Tova Linett (review)

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE
M. Lundblad
{"title":"Literary Bioethics: Animality, Disability, and the Human by Maren Tova Linett (review)","authors":"M. Lundblad","doi":"10.1215/0041462x-10404965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Let’s try a thought experiment. Animal-rights philosopher Peter Singer or disability-studies scholar Rosemarie Garland-Thomson? Are you confused? What if they were both in a burning building and you could save only one of them? How about this one: animal rights or disability rights? You might wonder if those must be the only choices. Maren Tova Linett’s Literary Bioethics: Animality, Disability, and the Human wants us to choose both of them, but not necessarily Peter Singer’s version of animal rights. Singer is notorious for arguing that the lives of certain animals can have more value than certain humans with disabilities. Linett’s new book argues instead that we should value all forms of human and nonhuman life equally, including both humans with disabilities and nonhuman animals. According to Linett, literary texts can function as what she calls “bioethical” thought experiments, dramatizing both problematic and defensible ethical positions. Novels in particular can provide much more complex sites for exploring these issues compared with oversimplified thought experiments that philosophers like Singer often propose. Linett’s aim is to bring together critical disability studies and critical animal studies by evaluating how various novels construct moral issues related to disability and animality. The book engages with moral philosophy, biopolitics, and posthumanism, all of which Linett suggests can be encompassed within a broader definition of bioethics, although some readers might prefer to maintain distinctions between these diverse fields. Linett’s selection of novels for exploring these questions might also raise some questions; she moves from H. G. Wells’s The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932), Flannery O’Connor’s The Violent Bear It Away (1960), and Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go (2005). Rather than emphasizing these texts in relation to their particular historical and cultural moments, or the generic conventions of either science fiction or speculative fiction, Linett focuses her four chapters on these novels as examples of “textual laboratories,","PeriodicalId":44252,"journal":{"name":"TWENTIETH CENTURY LITERATURE","volume":"120 1","pages":"105 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TWENTIETH CENTURY LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/0041462x-10404965","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Let’s try a thought experiment. Animal-rights philosopher Peter Singer or disability-studies scholar Rosemarie Garland-Thomson? Are you confused? What if they were both in a burning building and you could save only one of them? How about this one: animal rights or disability rights? You might wonder if those must be the only choices. Maren Tova Linett’s Literary Bioethics: Animality, Disability, and the Human wants us to choose both of them, but not necessarily Peter Singer’s version of animal rights. Singer is notorious for arguing that the lives of certain animals can have more value than certain humans with disabilities. Linett’s new book argues instead that we should value all forms of human and nonhuman life equally, including both humans with disabilities and nonhuman animals. According to Linett, literary texts can function as what she calls “bioethical” thought experiments, dramatizing both problematic and defensible ethical positions. Novels in particular can provide much more complex sites for exploring these issues compared with oversimplified thought experiments that philosophers like Singer often propose. Linett’s aim is to bring together critical disability studies and critical animal studies by evaluating how various novels construct moral issues related to disability and animality. The book engages with moral philosophy, biopolitics, and posthumanism, all of which Linett suggests can be encompassed within a broader definition of bioethics, although some readers might prefer to maintain distinctions between these diverse fields. Linett’s selection of novels for exploring these questions might also raise some questions; she moves from H. G. Wells’s The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932), Flannery O’Connor’s The Violent Bear It Away (1960), and Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go (2005). Rather than emphasizing these texts in relation to their particular historical and cultural moments, or the generic conventions of either science fiction or speculative fiction, Linett focuses her four chapters on these novels as examples of “textual laboratories,
《文学生命伦理学:动物、残疾和人类》作者:玛伦·托娃·利内特
让我们来做一个思想实验。是动物权利哲学家彼得·辛格,还是残疾研究学者罗斯玛丽·加兰德-汤姆森?你困惑了吗?如果他们都在一栋着火的大楼里,而你只能救其中一个呢?那这个呢:动物权利还是残疾人权利?你可能会想,这些是不是唯一的选择。玛伦·托娃·利内特的《文学生命伦理学:动物、残疾和人类》希望我们两者都选择,但不一定是彼得·辛格的动物权利版本。辛格因主张某些动物的生命比某些残疾人的生命更有价值而臭名昭著。相反,Linett的新书认为,我们应该平等地对待所有形式的人类和非人类生命,包括残疾人和非人类动物。根据Linett的说法,文学文本可以发挥她所谓的“生物伦理”思想实验的作用,将有问题的和可辩护的伦理立场戏剧化。与辛格等哲学家经常提出的过于简单的思想实验相比,小说尤其可以为探索这些问题提供更为复杂的场所。Linett的目的是通过评估各种小说如何构建与残疾和动物相关的道德问题,将批评性残疾研究和批评性动物研究结合起来。这本书涉及道德哲学、生命政治和后人类主义,Linett认为所有这些都可以包含在更广泛的生命伦理学定义中,尽管一些读者可能更倾向于保持这些不同领域之间的区别。Linett选择小说来探索这些问题也可能会提出一些问题;她从h.g.威尔斯的《莫罗医生岛》(1896)到奥尔德斯·赫胥黎的《美丽新世界》(1932),弗兰纳里·奥康纳的《暴力带走它》(1960),再到石黑一雄的《别让我走》(2005)。Linett并没有强调这些文本与它们特定的历史和文化时刻的关系,也没有强调科幻小说或投机小说的一般惯例,而是将她的四章集中在这些小说上,作为“文本实验室”的例子,
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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