美狄亚,一个宣言

J. Cherbuliez
{"title":"美狄亚,一个宣言","authors":"J. Cherbuliez","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv119911q.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the mythological figure of Medea, this chapter offers a counter-theory to the well-known symbol of ethical opposition to the State. While Antigone challenges certain politics of legacy, family, duty and so origins, Medea underscores the problem of our future by killing offspring and creating replacements. Medea operates at the limits of the moral imperative by virtue of her status as pharmakon: her knowledge can both heal and harm. She is also a Latourian “hybrid”: outside of our traditional categories of knowledge and identification, her actions challenge the integrity of the individual itself. Medea underscores relational attachments: mother to children, wife to husband, descendent to forebearers, even as she undoes these relations. Figuring Medea in our literature, the chapter argues, allows us to rehearse the real problem of the social: the false and fragile divisions that purportedly guard integrated insiders from barbaric outsiders and modernity from its necessary but primitive pasts.","PeriodicalId":263551,"journal":{"name":"In the Wake of Medea","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medea, a Manifesto\",\"authors\":\"J. Cherbuliez\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctv119911q.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With the mythological figure of Medea, this chapter offers a counter-theory to the well-known symbol of ethical opposition to the State. While Antigone challenges certain politics of legacy, family, duty and so origins, Medea underscores the problem of our future by killing offspring and creating replacements. Medea operates at the limits of the moral imperative by virtue of her status as pharmakon: her knowledge can both heal and harm. She is also a Latourian “hybrid”: outside of our traditional categories of knowledge and identification, her actions challenge the integrity of the individual itself. Medea underscores relational attachments: mother to children, wife to husband, descendent to forebearers, even as she undoes these relations. Figuring Medea in our literature, the chapter argues, allows us to rehearse the real problem of the social: the false and fragile divisions that purportedly guard integrated insiders from barbaric outsiders and modernity from its necessary but primitive pasts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":263551,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"In the Wake of Medea\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"In the Wake of Medea\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv119911q.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"In the Wake of Medea","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv119911q.5","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

本章以神话人物美狄亚为例,提供了一种与著名的伦理对立国家象征相反的理论。《安提戈涅》挑战了遗产、家庭、责任和起源等某些政治问题,而《美狄亚》则通过杀死后代和创造替代品来强调我们未来的问题。美狄亚凭借她作为药剂师的身份,在道德命令的极限上运作:她的知识既能治愈也能伤害。她也是拉图里的“混血儿”:在我们传统的知识和身份范畴之外,她的行为挑战了个人本身的完整性。美狄亚强调了关系的依恋:母亲对孩子,妻子对丈夫,后代对祖先,即使她解除了这些关系。这一章认为,在我们的文学作品中描绘美狄亚,使我们能够预见社会的真正问题:虚假而脆弱的分裂,据称可以保护整合的内部人免受野蛮的外部人的侵害,保护现代性免受必要但原始的过去的侵害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Medea, a Manifesto
With the mythological figure of Medea, this chapter offers a counter-theory to the well-known symbol of ethical opposition to the State. While Antigone challenges certain politics of legacy, family, duty and so origins, Medea underscores the problem of our future by killing offspring and creating replacements. Medea operates at the limits of the moral imperative by virtue of her status as pharmakon: her knowledge can both heal and harm. She is also a Latourian “hybrid”: outside of our traditional categories of knowledge and identification, her actions challenge the integrity of the individual itself. Medea underscores relational attachments: mother to children, wife to husband, descendent to forebearers, even as she undoes these relations. Figuring Medea in our literature, the chapter argues, allows us to rehearse the real problem of the social: the false and fragile divisions that purportedly guard integrated insiders from barbaric outsiders and modernity from its necessary but primitive pasts.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信