Coda

C. Forster
{"title":"Coda","authors":"C. Forster","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190840860.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This brief coda compares two related Parisian anglophone publishers and their most notable publications: Jack Kahane’s Obelisk Press, publisher of Henry Miller’s The Tropic Cancer; and Maurice Girodias’s Olympia Press, publisher of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita. It argues that the similarities and differences between these presses, and these novels, illustrate how the “end of obscenity” for books obsolesced the role of the transgressive continental English-language publisher. In both cases, the work published was at odds with how the publisher imagined its role—Miller actively sought to distance himself from the modernism that Kahane took as the justification of his press, whereas Nabokov took exception to being published alongside the pornography that Girodias celebrated. Each captures a tension between modernism, obscenity, and print as a medium.","PeriodicalId":308769,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Scholarship Online","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coda\",\"authors\":\"C. Forster\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780190840860.003.0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This brief coda compares two related Parisian anglophone publishers and their most notable publications: Jack Kahane’s Obelisk Press, publisher of Henry Miller’s The Tropic Cancer; and Maurice Girodias’s Olympia Press, publisher of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita. It argues that the similarities and differences between these presses, and these novels, illustrate how the “end of obscenity” for books obsolesced the role of the transgressive continental English-language publisher. In both cases, the work published was at odds with how the publisher imagined its role—Miller actively sought to distance himself from the modernism that Kahane took as the justification of his press, whereas Nabokov took exception to being published alongside the pornography that Girodias celebrated. Each captures a tension between modernism, obscenity, and print as a medium.\",\"PeriodicalId\":308769,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Scholarship Online\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Scholarship Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190840860.003.0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Scholarship Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190840860.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇简短的结语比较了两家相关的巴黎英语出版商和他们最著名的出版物:杰克·卡哈内的方尖碑出版社,亨利·米勒的《回归线》的出版商;莫里斯·吉罗迪亚斯的奥林匹亚出版社,弗拉基米尔·纳博科夫的《洛丽塔》的出版商。它认为,这些出版社和这些小说之间的异同,说明了书籍的“淫秽终结”是如何使越轨的大陆英语出版商的角色过时的。在这两种情况下,出版的作品都与出版商想象中的角色不一致——米勒积极地寻求与卡哈内认为是其出版的正当理由的现代主义保持距离,而纳博科夫则反对与吉罗迪亚斯推崇的色情作品一起出版。每一个都抓住了现代主义、淫秽和印刷作为媒介之间的紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Coda
This brief coda compares two related Parisian anglophone publishers and their most notable publications: Jack Kahane’s Obelisk Press, publisher of Henry Miller’s The Tropic Cancer; and Maurice Girodias’s Olympia Press, publisher of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita. It argues that the similarities and differences between these presses, and these novels, illustrate how the “end of obscenity” for books obsolesced the role of the transgressive continental English-language publisher. In both cases, the work published was at odds with how the publisher imagined its role—Miller actively sought to distance himself from the modernism that Kahane took as the justification of his press, whereas Nabokov took exception to being published alongside the pornography that Girodias celebrated. Each captures a tension between modernism, obscenity, and print as a medium.
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