{"title":"暴露中的信仰:十九世纪美国的隐私权与世俗主义》,作者 Justine S. Murison(评论)","authors":"Ray Horton","doi":"10.1353/eal.2024.a918920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States</em> by Justine S. Murison <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Ray Horton (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States</em><br/> <small>justine s. murison</small><br/> University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023<br/> 266 pp. <p>\"Make Margaret Atwood Fiction Again,\" exclaimed a banner at the Women's March on Inauguration Day in January 2016. One of the great protest slogans to emerge from the presidency of Donald Trump, this comparison between the regressive state of Gilead in Atwood's <em>The Handmaid's Tale</em> (1985) and the future portended by Trump's coziness with the Christian Right illuminates a key tension within American secularism. On the one hand, in a secular age, many people routinely think of religious faith as a matter of private rather than public concern; on the other hand, as Justine Murison argues in the introduction of <em>Faith in Exposure</em>, \"secularism is not so much the absence of religion from the public sphere … but is instead a prescriptive orientation to the world\" (4), one that presumes religion's banishment to the private sphere even as it enables \"secular institutions to retain their Protestant structures\" (7). The nightmare invoked by <em>The Handmaid's Tale</em> and the protest signs it inspired hinge on the danger that the private religious convictions of some, by way of the public mechanisms of politics and law, will trump the right to privacy enjoyed by others, especially where the right to privacy concerns gender, sexuality, and reproduction.</p> <p>In <em>Faith in Exposure</em>, Murison historicizes this contested terrain between privacy and secularism in American literature and culture, explaining \"how, over the course of the nineteenth century, privacy came to encompass such contradictions—underpinning the right to sexual and reproductive rights but also undermining them in the name of religious freedom\" (1). To this end, Murison's thorough and persuasive cultural history of religion and privacy in the nineteenth century proves to be a master class in what Victorianists affiliated with the V21 Collective call \"strategic presentism,\" an approach to literary history that highlights how contemporary concerns animate our investment in questions about earlier periods (\"Manifesto of the V21 Collective,\" http://v21collective.org/manifesto-of-the-v21-collective-ten-theses/). For Murison, \"a study of the nineteenth-century <strong>[End Page 187]</strong> American novel,\" which she calls \"the literary form most closely associated with modern subjectivity and the private lives of individuals\" (2), not only reveals how fiction happened to respond to nineteenth-century debates about privacy; it also illuminates the religious subtext of twentieth- and twenty-first-century debates over the right to privacy, from <em>Roe v. Wade</em> (1973) to <em>Obergefell v. Hodges</em> (2015) to the aftermath of <em>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</em> (2022). Behind this argument lies an important commitment to what the study of literature can offer to interdisciplinary fields such as secular studies. Nineteenth-century novels don't just shed light on the problems of the nineteenth century; they also offer resources for grappling with difficult questions that vex us today. Fiction itself, Murison implies throughout her book, might help us as we try to figure out how to make Margaret Atwood fiction again.</p> <p>As a contribution to the growing field known variously as postsecular criticism, secularization theory, or secular studies, <em>Faith in Exposure</em> builds explicitly on the work of other Americanists who, like Peter Coviello and Jared Hickman in their introduction to a 2014 special issue of <em>American Literature</em> titled \"After the Postsecular,\" have pronounced the secularization thesis \"dead.\" The postsecular, Coviello and Hickman argue, \"dares to suggest that we might do our thinking about modernity … under a sign other than 'the secular'\" (649), a line of inquiry that asks \"what, if anything, the secular might mean in the context of US literary history\" (650). In close dialogue with Tracy Fessenden's <em>Culture and Redemption</em> (Princeton UP, 2007), John Lardas Modern's <em>Secularism in Antebellum America</em> (U of Chicago P, 2011), Elizabeth Fenton's <em>Religious Liberties</em> (Oxford UP, 2011), Claudia Stokes's <em>The Altar at Home</em> (U of Pennsylvania P, 2014), and Ashley Barnes's <em>Love and Depth in the American Novel</em> (U of Virginia P, 2020), <em>Faith in Exposure</em> adds a significant new...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":44043,"journal":{"name":"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States by Justine S. Murison (review)\",\"authors\":\"Ray Horton\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/eal.2024.a918920\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States</em> by Justine S. Murison <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Ray Horton (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States</em><br/> <small>justine s. murison</small><br/> University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023<br/> 266 pp. <p>\\\"Make Margaret Atwood Fiction Again,\\\" exclaimed a banner at the Women's March on Inauguration Day in January 2016. One of the great protest slogans to emerge from the presidency of Donald Trump, this comparison between the regressive state of Gilead in Atwood's <em>The Handmaid's Tale</em> (1985) and the future portended by Trump's coziness with the Christian Right illuminates a key tension within American secularism. On the one hand, in a secular age, many people routinely think of religious faith as a matter of private rather than public concern; on the other hand, as Justine Murison argues in the introduction of <em>Faith in Exposure</em>, \\\"secularism is not so much the absence of religion from the public sphere … but is instead a prescriptive orientation to the world\\\" (4), one that presumes religion's banishment to the private sphere even as it enables \\\"secular institutions to retain their Protestant structures\\\" (7). The nightmare invoked by <em>The Handmaid's Tale</em> and the protest signs it inspired hinge on the danger that the private religious convictions of some, by way of the public mechanisms of politics and law, will trump the right to privacy enjoyed by others, especially where the right to privacy concerns gender, sexuality, and reproduction.</p> <p>In <em>Faith in Exposure</em>, Murison historicizes this contested terrain between privacy and secularism in American literature and culture, explaining \\\"how, over the course of the nineteenth century, privacy came to encompass such contradictions—underpinning the right to sexual and reproductive rights but also undermining them in the name of religious freedom\\\" (1). To this end, Murison's thorough and persuasive cultural history of religion and privacy in the nineteenth century proves to be a master class in what Victorianists affiliated with the V21 Collective call \\\"strategic presentism,\\\" an approach to literary history that highlights how contemporary concerns animate our investment in questions about earlier periods (\\\"Manifesto of the V21 Collective,\\\" http://v21collective.org/manifesto-of-the-v21-collective-ten-theses/). For Murison, \\\"a study of the nineteenth-century <strong>[End Page 187]</strong> American novel,\\\" which she calls \\\"the literary form most closely associated with modern subjectivity and the private lives of individuals\\\" (2), not only reveals how fiction happened to respond to nineteenth-century debates about privacy; it also illuminates the religious subtext of twentieth- and twenty-first-century debates over the right to privacy, from <em>Roe v. Wade</em> (1973) to <em>Obergefell v. Hodges</em> (2015) to the aftermath of <em>Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization</em> (2022). Behind this argument lies an important commitment to what the study of literature can offer to interdisciplinary fields such as secular studies. Nineteenth-century novels don't just shed light on the problems of the nineteenth century; they also offer resources for grappling with difficult questions that vex us today. Fiction itself, Murison implies throughout her book, might help us as we try to figure out how to make Margaret Atwood fiction again.</p> <p>As a contribution to the growing field known variously as postsecular criticism, secularization theory, or secular studies, <em>Faith in Exposure</em> builds explicitly on the work of other Americanists who, like Peter Coviello and Jared Hickman in their introduction to a 2014 special issue of <em>American Literature</em> titled \\\"After the Postsecular,\\\" have pronounced the secularization thesis \\\"dead.\\\" The postsecular, Coviello and Hickman argue, \\\"dares to suggest that we might do our thinking about modernity … under a sign other than 'the secular'\\\" (649), a line of inquiry that asks \\\"what, if anything, the secular might mean in the context of US literary history\\\" (650). In close dialogue with Tracy Fessenden's <em>Culture and Redemption</em> (Princeton UP, 2007), John Lardas Modern's <em>Secularism in Antebellum America</em> (U of Chicago P, 2011), Elizabeth Fenton's <em>Religious Liberties</em> (Oxford UP, 2011), Claudia Stokes's <em>The Altar at Home</em> (U of Pennsylvania P, 2014), and Ashley Barnes's <em>Love and Depth in the American Novel</em> (U of Virginia P, 2020), <em>Faith in Exposure</em> adds a significant new...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/eal.2024.a918920\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, AMERICAN\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EARLY AMERICAN LITERATURE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eal.2024.a918920","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, AMERICAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者: 暴露中的信仰:Justine S. Murison 著 Ray Horton 译(简历) 《暴露中的信仰:十九世纪美国的隐私权与世俗主义》(Faith in Exposure:Justine S. Murison 宾夕法尼亚大学出版社,2023 年 266 页。"让玛格丽特-阿特伍德再次成为小说",2016 年 1 月就职日妇女游行队伍中的一条横幅发出了这样的感叹。阿特伍德的《女仆的故事》(The Handmaid's Tale,1985 年)中吉利德的倒退状态与特朗普与基督教右翼的亲密关系所预示的未来之间的对比,揭示了美国世俗主义中的一个关键矛盾。一方面,在世俗时代,许多人通常认为宗教信仰是私人问题而非公共问题;另一方面,正如贾丝廷-穆里森(Justine Murison)在《暴露中的信仰》(Faith in Exposure)一书的导言中所说,"世俗主义与其说是宗教在公共领域的缺席......不如说是对世界的一种规定性定位"(4),这种定位假定宗教被驱逐到私人领域,即使它能使 "世俗机构保留其新教结构"(7)。女仆的故事》所引发的噩梦以及它所激发的抗议标语,都是基于这样一种危险:一些人的私人宗教信仰,通过政治和法律的公共机制,将压倒其他人所享有的隐私权,尤其是当隐私权涉及性别、性和生殖时。在《暴露中的信仰》一书中,穆里森对美国文学和文化中隐私权与世俗主义之间的这一争议地带进行了历史性的梳理,解释了 "在 19 世纪的过程中,隐私权是如何包含这种矛盾的--既是性权利和生殖权利的基础,又以宗教自由的名义破坏了这些权利"(1)。为此,穆里森关于 19 世纪宗教与隐私的详尽而有说服力的文化史,被证明是维多利亚时代的 "V21 集体 "成员称之为 "战略现世主义 "的大师级作品,这种文学史方法强调了当代的关注如何激发我们对早期问题的投入("V21 集体宣言",http://v21collective.org/manifesto-of-the-v21-collective-ten-theses/)。在穆里森看来,"对十九世纪 [第187页完] 美国小说的研究"--她称之为 "与现代主体性和个人私生活最密切相关的文学形式" (2)--不仅揭示了小说是如何回应十九世纪关于隐私权的争论的;它还揭示了二十世纪和二十一世纪关于隐私权争论的宗教潜台词,从《罗伊诉韦德案》(Roe v. Wade)(1973 年)到《奥伯丁案》(Oberford v. Wade)。韦德案》(1973 年)到《奥伯格费尔诉霍奇斯案》(2015 年),再到《多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案》(2022 年)的后果。在这一论点的背后,是对文学研究能够为世俗研究等跨学科领域提供什么的重要承诺。十九世纪的小说不仅仅揭示了十九世纪的问题,它们还为解决困扰我们今天的难题提供了资源。穆里森在全书中暗示,当我们试图找出如何让玛格丽特-阿特伍德再次成为小说时,小说本身可能会帮助我们。作为对日益壮大的后世俗批评、世俗化理论或世俗研究等领域的贡献,《暴露中的信仰》明确借鉴了其他美国学家的研究成果,比如彼得-科维洛(Peter Coviello)和贾里德-希克曼(Jared Hickman)在2014年《美国文学》特刊 "后世俗"(After the Postsecular)的导言中,宣布世俗化论题 "已死"。科维洛和希克曼认为,"后世俗""敢于建议我们可以在'世俗'之外的标志下......进行现代性思考"(649),这一研究思路提出了 "在美国文学史的语境中,世俗意味着什么"(650)。与特蕾西-费森登(Tracy Fessenden)的《文化与救赎》(普林斯顿大学出版社,2007 年)、约翰-拉达斯-摩登(John Lardas Modern)的《前美国的世俗主义》(芝加哥大学出版社,2011 年)、伊丽莎白-芬顿(Elizabeth Fenton)的《宗教自由》(牛津大学出版社,2011 年)、克劳迪娅-斯托克斯(Claudia Stokes)的《家中的祭坛》(宾夕法尼亚大学出版社,2014 年)以及阿什利-巴恩斯(Ashley Barnes)的《美国小说中的爱与深度》(弗吉尼亚大学出版社,2020 年)密切对话,《暴露中的信仰》为美国文学史增添了重要的新内容。
Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States by Justine S. Murison (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:
Reviewed by:
Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States by Justine S. Murison
Ray Horton (bio)
Faith in Exposure: Privacy and Secularism in the Nineteenth-Century United States justine s. murison University of Pennsylvania Press, 2023 266 pp.
"Make Margaret Atwood Fiction Again," exclaimed a banner at the Women's March on Inauguration Day in January 2016. One of the great protest slogans to emerge from the presidency of Donald Trump, this comparison between the regressive state of Gilead in Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale (1985) and the future portended by Trump's coziness with the Christian Right illuminates a key tension within American secularism. On the one hand, in a secular age, many people routinely think of religious faith as a matter of private rather than public concern; on the other hand, as Justine Murison argues in the introduction of Faith in Exposure, "secularism is not so much the absence of religion from the public sphere … but is instead a prescriptive orientation to the world" (4), one that presumes religion's banishment to the private sphere even as it enables "secular institutions to retain their Protestant structures" (7). The nightmare invoked by The Handmaid's Tale and the protest signs it inspired hinge on the danger that the private religious convictions of some, by way of the public mechanisms of politics and law, will trump the right to privacy enjoyed by others, especially where the right to privacy concerns gender, sexuality, and reproduction.
In Faith in Exposure, Murison historicizes this contested terrain between privacy and secularism in American literature and culture, explaining "how, over the course of the nineteenth century, privacy came to encompass such contradictions—underpinning the right to sexual and reproductive rights but also undermining them in the name of religious freedom" (1). To this end, Murison's thorough and persuasive cultural history of religion and privacy in the nineteenth century proves to be a master class in what Victorianists affiliated with the V21 Collective call "strategic presentism," an approach to literary history that highlights how contemporary concerns animate our investment in questions about earlier periods ("Manifesto of the V21 Collective," http://v21collective.org/manifesto-of-the-v21-collective-ten-theses/). For Murison, "a study of the nineteenth-century [End Page 187] American novel," which she calls "the literary form most closely associated with modern subjectivity and the private lives of individuals" (2), not only reveals how fiction happened to respond to nineteenth-century debates about privacy; it also illuminates the religious subtext of twentieth- and twenty-first-century debates over the right to privacy, from Roe v. Wade (1973) to Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) to the aftermath of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022). Behind this argument lies an important commitment to what the study of literature can offer to interdisciplinary fields such as secular studies. Nineteenth-century novels don't just shed light on the problems of the nineteenth century; they also offer resources for grappling with difficult questions that vex us today. Fiction itself, Murison implies throughout her book, might help us as we try to figure out how to make Margaret Atwood fiction again.
As a contribution to the growing field known variously as postsecular criticism, secularization theory, or secular studies, Faith in Exposure builds explicitly on the work of other Americanists who, like Peter Coviello and Jared Hickman in their introduction to a 2014 special issue of American Literature titled "After the Postsecular," have pronounced the secularization thesis "dead." The postsecular, Coviello and Hickman argue, "dares to suggest that we might do our thinking about modernity … under a sign other than 'the secular'" (649), a line of inquiry that asks "what, if anything, the secular might mean in the context of US literary history" (650). In close dialogue with Tracy Fessenden's Culture and Redemption (Princeton UP, 2007), John Lardas Modern's Secularism in Antebellum America (U of Chicago P, 2011), Elizabeth Fenton's Religious Liberties (Oxford UP, 2011), Claudia Stokes's The Altar at Home (U of Pennsylvania P, 2014), and Ashley Barnes's Love and Depth in the American Novel (U of Virginia P, 2020), Faith in Exposure adds a significant new...