对艰难时期感到厌倦

Kailana Durnan
{"title":"对艰难时期感到厌倦","authors":"Kailana Durnan","doi":"10.5325/DICKSTUDANNU.49.2.0402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract:This essay confronts an impasse in criticism of Charles Dickens’s Hard Times (1854) by working to take the novel’s principal weakness—its tediousness—seriously, not only as a matter of sociohistorical concern, but also as a strategy for literary representation. I situate the novel within a cultural history of boredom that originates in the eighteenth century, arguing that Hard Times represents an important moment in the synthetic development of a democratic conceptualization of this situated psychological condition. As such, the novel forges similarities across differences in class, professional, and gender identity, and models a form of collectivizing sympathetic attention that works against novelistic teleology to productively frustrate readerly pleasure. The essay works to challenge the factory/circus binary that so often dominates critical accounts of the novel, instead illuminating Dickens’s ambivalent interest in this unlikely (because anti-energetic) source of textual energy. In locating boredom as the novel’s guiding heuristic, I argue, we can better account for the affordances and limits of Hard Times’ antiutilitarian critique as well as its politics of reading.","PeriodicalId":195639,"journal":{"name":"Dickens Studies Annual: Essays on Victorian Fiction","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Getting Bored with Hard Times\",\"authors\":\"Kailana Durnan\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/DICKSTUDANNU.49.2.0402\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract:This essay confronts an impasse in criticism of Charles Dickens’s Hard Times (1854) by working to take the novel’s principal weakness—its tediousness—seriously, not only as a matter of sociohistorical concern, but also as a strategy for literary representation. I situate the novel within a cultural history of boredom that originates in the eighteenth century, arguing that Hard Times represents an important moment in the synthetic development of a democratic conceptualization of this situated psychological condition. As such, the novel forges similarities across differences in class, professional, and gender identity, and models a form of collectivizing sympathetic attention that works against novelistic teleology to productively frustrate readerly pleasure. The essay works to challenge the factory/circus binary that so often dominates critical accounts of the novel, instead illuminating Dickens’s ambivalent interest in this unlikely (because anti-energetic) source of textual energy. In locating boredom as the novel’s guiding heuristic, I argue, we can better account for the affordances and limits of Hard Times’ antiutilitarian critique as well as its politics of reading.\",\"PeriodicalId\":195639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dickens Studies Annual: Essays on Victorian Fiction\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dickens Studies Annual: Essays on Victorian Fiction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/DICKSTUDANNU.49.2.0402\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dickens Studies Annual: Essays on Victorian Fiction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/DICKSTUDANNU.49.2.0402","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文不仅从社会历史的角度出发,而且从文学表现的角度出发,认真对待查尔斯·狄更斯的小说《艰难时期》(1854)的主要缺点——乏味,从而面对批评的僵局。我把这部小说置于起源于18世纪的无聊文化史中,认为《艰难时期》代表了这种处境心理状况的民主概念化综合发展的一个重要时刻。因此,这部小说在阶级、职业和性别认同的差异中伪造了相似之处,并塑造了一种集体同情关注的形式,这种形式与小说目的论背道而驰,从而有效地挫败了读者的乐趣。文章挑战工厂工作/马戏团二进制,占主导地位的关键帐户的小说,而不是照亮狄更斯的矛盾这个不太可能(因为anti-energetic)感兴趣的文本的能量来源。我认为,将无聊定位为小说的指导启发式,我们可以更好地解释《艰难时期》的反功利主义批判及其阅读政治的优点和局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Getting Bored with Hard Times
abstract:This essay confronts an impasse in criticism of Charles Dickens’s Hard Times (1854) by working to take the novel’s principal weakness—its tediousness—seriously, not only as a matter of sociohistorical concern, but also as a strategy for literary representation. I situate the novel within a cultural history of boredom that originates in the eighteenth century, arguing that Hard Times represents an important moment in the synthetic development of a democratic conceptualization of this situated psychological condition. As such, the novel forges similarities across differences in class, professional, and gender identity, and models a form of collectivizing sympathetic attention that works against novelistic teleology to productively frustrate readerly pleasure. The essay works to challenge the factory/circus binary that so often dominates critical accounts of the novel, instead illuminating Dickens’s ambivalent interest in this unlikely (because anti-energetic) source of textual energy. In locating boredom as the novel’s guiding heuristic, I argue, we can better account for the affordances and limits of Hard Times’ antiutilitarian critique as well as its politics of reading.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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