Who’s Afraid of Historicizing? How Protestant Anti-historicism Became Literary Self-Defense

IF 0.1 0 LITERATURE, AMERICAN
Ashley C. Barnes
{"title":"Who’s Afraid of Historicizing? How Protestant Anti-historicism Became Literary Self-Defense","authors":"Ashley C. Barnes","doi":"10.1353/jnc.2020.0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Recent calls for literary critics to return to form and affect have faulted historicist methods for denying textual alterity. Historicism was likewise cast as a tool for denying textual power in the course of Protestant debates about Bible reading in the late nineteenth century. This essay tracks the charge of historicist narcissism as a constitutive link between sacred and secular reading practices from then to now. It describes a shared project, carried on by literary studies and theology alike, of protecting free agency from the felt threat of historicist determinism. But by reexamining the theological counterargument for a historicism that enhanced, not diminished, a reader’s encounter with divine alterity, the essay also demonstrates that historicism is not always secularizing. The point is not to argue for a more thoroughly secular mode of historicism, nor to expose the religiosity at the heart of literary studies. The point is to articulate an ideal of historically embedded alterity that can stand as a professional value worth defending.","PeriodicalId":41876,"journal":{"name":"J19-The Journal of Nineteenth-Century Americanists","volume":"58 1","pages":"321 - 346"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J19-The Journal of Nineteenth-Century Americanists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jnc.2020.0017","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: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Recent calls for literary critics to return to form and affect have faulted historicist methods for denying textual alterity. Historicism was likewise cast as a tool for denying textual power in the course of Protestant debates about Bible reading in the late nineteenth century. This essay tracks the charge of historicist narcissism as a constitutive link between sacred and secular reading practices from then to now. It describes a shared project, carried on by literary studies and theology alike, of protecting free agency from the felt threat of historicist determinism. But by reexamining the theological counterargument for a historicism that enhanced, not diminished, a reader’s encounter with divine alterity, the essay also demonstrates that historicism is not always secularizing. The point is not to argue for a more thoroughly secular mode of historicism, nor to expose the religiosity at the heart of literary studies. The point is to articulate an ideal of historically embedded alterity that can stand as a professional value worth defending.
谁害怕被历史化?新教反历史主义如何成为文学自卫
摘要:近年来,人们呼吁文学批评家回归形式和情感,这是对历史主义方法否认文本替代性的批评。在19世纪后期新教关于圣经阅读的辩论中,历史决定论同样被视为否认文本力量的工具。这篇文章追踪了从那时到现在,历史主义自恋作为神圣和世俗阅读实践之间的构成纽带的指控。它描述了一个由文学研究和神学共同进行的项目,即保护自由代理免受历史决定论的威胁。但是,通过重新审视历史决定论的神学反驳,这篇文章也证明了历史决定论并不总是世俗化的。历史决定论增强了,而不是削弱了,读者与神性的相遇。我的观点并不是要论证一种更为彻底的世俗的历史主义模式,也不是要揭露文学研究核心的宗教性。关键是要阐明一种历史上根深蒂固的另类理想,这种理想可以作为一种值得捍卫的专业价值。
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
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
×
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