种族的发明与黑人的地位

IF 0.3 3区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
C. J. Whitaker
{"title":"种族的发明与黑人的地位","authors":"C. J. Whitaker","doi":"10.1017/pli.2021.39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is at this point a longstanding tradition that scholarly works investigating Black and African presences in premodernity, works that challenge accepted notions about the origins of and participants in Western civilization, meet with significant resistance in the marketplace of ideas. The scholarship in question has focused on a wide range of subjects—from the roots of Greco-Roman knowledge and culture to the presence of Africans in those established centers of classical antiquity to the role of Africans in the Old World’s exploration of the New. Yet, resistance arises at every turn. The case is no different for Geraldine Heng’s 2018 The Invention of Race in the EuropeanMiddle Ages—except that this time the focus is the European Middle Ages. The book deftly introduces and defines “race-making” to describe the very active process by which elements of what I have called “race-thinking” are coalesced in the Middle Ages as race proceeds toward the ideological status it achieves in modernity. Of the now six full-length monographs—including my own—that take as their primary inquiry the nature, development, and salience of race in the European Middle Ages, Invention is the most ambitious and proceeds from the “thoroughly interdisciplinary vantage required of a concept as ideologically powerful and multifaceted as race, one whose study defies disciplinary divisions between literature, history, biology, sociology, and anthropology, among other fields.”1 Praise has been swift. So has backlash. This article will consider the latter in order to understand the motivations and implications of criticisms against studies that similarly innovate within their fields.","PeriodicalId":42913,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry","volume":"9 1","pages":"149 - 158"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Invention of Race and the Status of Blackness\",\"authors\":\"C. J. Whitaker\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/pli.2021.39\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is at this point a longstanding tradition that scholarly works investigating Black and African presences in premodernity, works that challenge accepted notions about the origins of and participants in Western civilization, meet with significant resistance in the marketplace of ideas. The scholarship in question has focused on a wide range of subjects—from the roots of Greco-Roman knowledge and culture to the presence of Africans in those established centers of classical antiquity to the role of Africans in the Old World’s exploration of the New. Yet, resistance arises at every turn. The case is no different for Geraldine Heng’s 2018 The Invention of Race in the EuropeanMiddle Ages—except that this time the focus is the European Middle Ages. The book deftly introduces and defines “race-making” to describe the very active process by which elements of what I have called “race-thinking” are coalesced in the Middle Ages as race proceeds toward the ideological status it achieves in modernity. Of the now six full-length monographs—including my own—that take as their primary inquiry the nature, development, and salience of race in the European Middle Ages, Invention is the most ambitious and proceeds from the “thoroughly interdisciplinary vantage required of a concept as ideologically powerful and multifaceted as race, one whose study defies disciplinary divisions between literature, history, biology, sociology, and anthropology, among other fields.”1 Praise has been swift. So has backlash. This article will consider the latter in order to understand the motivations and implications of criticisms against studies that similarly innovate within their fields.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42913,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"149 - 158\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/pli.2021.39\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/pli.2021.39","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这一点上,一个长期的传统是,研究前现代黑人和非洲人存在的学术作品,挑战关于西方文明起源和参与者的公认观念的作品,在思想市场上遇到了巨大的阻力。有问题的学术关注广泛的主题——从希腊罗马知识和文化的根源,到非洲人在那些古老的中心的存在,再到非洲人在旧世界探索新世界中的作用。然而,阻力无处不在。Geraldine Heng 2018年的《欧洲中世纪的种族发明》也没有什么不同,只是这次的焦点是欧洲中世纪。这本书巧妙地介绍并定义了“种族制造”,以描述一个非常活跃的过程,在中世纪,随着种族走向其在现代性中所达到的意识形态地位,我所称的“种族制造(race-thinking)”的元素通过这个过程融合在一起。在现在的六本长篇专著中,包括我自己的专著,它们主要探讨了欧洲中世纪种族的性质、发展和突出性,发明是最雄心勃勃的,它来自于“一个像种族这样思想强大和多方面的概念所需要的完全跨学科的优势,这个概念的研究挑战了文学、历史、生物学、社会学和人类学等领域之间的学科划分。”。反弹也是如此。本文将考虑后者,以了解对其领域内类似创新研究的批评的动机和含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Invention of Race and the Status of Blackness
It is at this point a longstanding tradition that scholarly works investigating Black and African presences in premodernity, works that challenge accepted notions about the origins of and participants in Western civilization, meet with significant resistance in the marketplace of ideas. The scholarship in question has focused on a wide range of subjects—from the roots of Greco-Roman knowledge and culture to the presence of Africans in those established centers of classical antiquity to the role of Africans in the Old World’s exploration of the New. Yet, resistance arises at every turn. The case is no different for Geraldine Heng’s 2018 The Invention of Race in the EuropeanMiddle Ages—except that this time the focus is the European Middle Ages. The book deftly introduces and defines “race-making” to describe the very active process by which elements of what I have called “race-thinking” are coalesced in the Middle Ages as race proceeds toward the ideological status it achieves in modernity. Of the now six full-length monographs—including my own—that take as their primary inquiry the nature, development, and salience of race in the European Middle Ages, Invention is the most ambitious and proceeds from the “thoroughly interdisciplinary vantage required of a concept as ideologically powerful and multifaceted as race, one whose study defies disciplinary divisions between literature, history, biology, sociology, and anthropology, among other fields.”1 Praise has been swift. So has backlash. This article will consider the latter in order to understand the motivations and implications of criticisms against studies that similarly innovate within their fields.
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
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
×
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