大声朗读斯宾诺莎的《伦理学》给文本带来了什么

Jonathan Lahey Dronsfield
{"title":"大声朗读斯宾诺莎的《伦理学》给文本带来了什么","authors":"Jonathan Lahey Dronsfield","doi":"10.24135/ijara.vi.675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is contended by Gilles Deleuze that concepts can be understood as characters, and their interaction with other concepts dramatised. He proposes Spinoza’s Ethics as a text worthy of such dramatisation. I test Deleuze’s assertion, by staging a series of “affective readings”, 24-hour public readings out loud of the Ethics which unfold the question of how the concept of affect as it is treated there might be dramatised, and how we might be affected by it in the reading. This paper provides the philosophical justification of such a reading, and argues that an affective reading is one which makes perceptible the differential relations between the forces operating on the concept, and therefore needs to perform the concept of which it speaks, in a space of thought in which the drama of thinking the concept can be seen to be taking place. In turn, then, this paper considers what is meant by a “performative reading”. Given that the veracity of a performative reading of Ethics rests on the idea that reading it out loud brings to (or takes away from) the text something a silent reading does not, it is important to distinguish how reading out loud grasps the text differently from reading it silently, both cognitively in terms of what it demonstrates, and practically in terms of its effects. ","PeriodicalId":403565,"journal":{"name":"Interstices: journal of architecture and related arts","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What reading Spinoza’s Ethics out loud brings to and takes from the text\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan Lahey Dronsfield\",\"doi\":\"10.24135/ijara.vi.675\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is contended by Gilles Deleuze that concepts can be understood as characters, and their interaction with other concepts dramatised. He proposes Spinoza’s Ethics as a text worthy of such dramatisation. I test Deleuze’s assertion, by staging a series of “affective readings”, 24-hour public readings out loud of the Ethics which unfold the question of how the concept of affect as it is treated there might be dramatised, and how we might be affected by it in the reading. This paper provides the philosophical justification of such a reading, and argues that an affective reading is one which makes perceptible the differential relations between the forces operating on the concept, and therefore needs to perform the concept of which it speaks, in a space of thought in which the drama of thinking the concept can be seen to be taking place. In turn, then, this paper considers what is meant by a “performative reading”. Given that the veracity of a performative reading of Ethics rests on the idea that reading it out loud brings to (or takes away from) the text something a silent reading does not, it is important to distinguish how reading out loud grasps the text differently from reading it silently, both cognitively in terms of what it demonstrates, and practically in terms of its effects. \",\"PeriodicalId\":403565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interstices: journal of architecture and related arts\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interstices: journal of architecture and related arts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.24135/ijara.vi.675\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interstices: journal of architecture and related arts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24135/ijara.vi.675","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

吉尔·德勒兹认为,概念可以被理解为人物,它们与其他概念的相互作用是戏剧化的。他认为斯宾诺莎的《伦理学》值得如此戏剧化。为了检验德勒兹的论断,我进行了一系列“情感解读”,24小时公开朗读《伦理学》,这些解读揭示了情感的概念是如何被戏剧化处理的,以及我们在阅读过程中如何受到它的影响。本文为这种解读提供了哲学上的依据,并认为情感解读是一种能够感知作用于概念的各种力量之间的差别关系的解读,因此,情感解读需要在一个思维空间中表现它所谈论的概念,在这个思维空间中,概念的思维戏剧可以被看到。接着,本文探讨了“表演性阅读”的含义。鉴于《伦理学》的表演性阅读的真实性取决于大声朗读给文本带来(或带走)沉默朗读所没有的东西,区分大声朗读和默读如何不同地理解文本是很重要的,无论是从它所展示的认知方面,还是从它的实际效果方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What reading Spinoza’s Ethics out loud brings to and takes from the text
It is contended by Gilles Deleuze that concepts can be understood as characters, and their interaction with other concepts dramatised. He proposes Spinoza’s Ethics as a text worthy of such dramatisation. I test Deleuze’s assertion, by staging a series of “affective readings”, 24-hour public readings out loud of the Ethics which unfold the question of how the concept of affect as it is treated there might be dramatised, and how we might be affected by it in the reading. This paper provides the philosophical justification of such a reading, and argues that an affective reading is one which makes perceptible the differential relations between the forces operating on the concept, and therefore needs to perform the concept of which it speaks, in a space of thought in which the drama of thinking the concept can be seen to be taking place. In turn, then, this paper considers what is meant by a “performative reading”. Given that the veracity of a performative reading of Ethics rests on the idea that reading it out loud brings to (or takes away from) the text something a silent reading does not, it is important to distinguish how reading out loud grasps the text differently from reading it silently, both cognitively in terms of what it demonstrates, and practically in terms of its effects. 
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
CiteScore
0.10
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