《珍贵:身份、改编与非裔美国青年电影》凯瑟琳·怀特赫斯特(书评)

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
E. L. Perro
{"title":"《珍贵:身份、改编与非裔美国青年电影》凯瑟琳·怀特赫斯特(书评)","authors":"E. L. Perro","doi":"10.5325/reception.15.1.0138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"03/07/23 4:25 PM Reception_15_15_Book_Reviews.indd Page 139 03/07/23 4:25 PM reception 138 with obvious stakes for the literary standing of the works in the minds of readers. The chapter on Ellison’s Invisible Man reveals how some readers believed the novel illustrated the plight of Black men in general, and others found it only pertained to a certain subset of African Americans, whereas still others thought that certain aspects of the characters’ experience were universal. Goldstein discusses commentary on Beloved in a later chapter that interprets the novel as a literal ghost story, as opposed to the views of readers that emphasize that the reappearance of the dead was a device Morrison used to represent traumatic memories. Whether Invisible Man is merely a novel with relevance to a niche population or if Beloved should be discredited for being too fantastic are questions that stir readers’ passions—and correlate with their responses to depictions of race and gender in the fiction. I also commend Goldstein for recognizing and discussing the place of literary status in the reception process, notably the public perception of Morrison and Ellison as great writers on weighty subjects, which often compelled nonacademic readers to embrace these works despite their difficulty. I discovered through this book that Goldstein and I do not picture the same ends to reception study although we agree completely on its principles and value. But because I was always attracted to the cross-disciplinary, big tent mentality of the Reception Study Society and Reception, I am not deterred in the least. In fact, The Theory and Practice of Reception Study inspires me for keeping open meaningful debates about how reception should play a role in literary criticism. Goldstein’s book is proof that we in this society thoughtfully reexamine and regularly expand the capabilities of our field.","PeriodicalId":40584,"journal":{"name":"Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History","volume":"90 1","pages":"138 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Precious: Identity, Adaptation, and the African-American Youth Film by Katherine Whitehurst (review)\",\"authors\":\"E. L. Perro\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/reception.15.1.0138\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"03/07/23 4:25 PM Reception_15_15_Book_Reviews.indd Page 139 03/07/23 4:25 PM reception 138 with obvious stakes for the literary standing of the works in the minds of readers. The chapter on Ellison’s Invisible Man reveals how some readers believed the novel illustrated the plight of Black men in general, and others found it only pertained to a certain subset of African Americans, whereas still others thought that certain aspects of the characters’ experience were universal. Goldstein discusses commentary on Beloved in a later chapter that interprets the novel as a literal ghost story, as opposed to the views of readers that emphasize that the reappearance of the dead was a device Morrison used to represent traumatic memories. Whether Invisible Man is merely a novel with relevance to a niche population or if Beloved should be discredited for being too fantastic are questions that stir readers’ passions—and correlate with their responses to depictions of race and gender in the fiction. I also commend Goldstein for recognizing and discussing the place of literary status in the reception process, notably the public perception of Morrison and Ellison as great writers on weighty subjects, which often compelled nonacademic readers to embrace these works despite their difficulty. I discovered through this book that Goldstein and I do not picture the same ends to reception study although we agree completely on its principles and value. But because I was always attracted to the cross-disciplinary, big tent mentality of the Reception Study Society and Reception, I am not deterred in the least. In fact, The Theory and Practice of Reception Study inspires me for keeping open meaningful debates about how reception should play a role in literary criticism. Goldstein’s book is proof that we in this society thoughtfully reexamine and regularly expand the capabilities of our field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History\",\"volume\":\"90 1\",\"pages\":\"138 - 141\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/reception.15.1.0138\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/reception.15.1.0138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

03/07/23下午4:25第139页23年3月7日下午4点25分接待138显然事关作品在读者心目中的文学地位。埃里森的《看不见的人》一章揭示了一些读者认为这部小说描绘了黑人的普遍困境,而另一些人则认为它只涉及非洲裔美国人的一部分,而还有一些人认为人物经历的某些方面是普遍的。戈德斯坦在后面的章节中讨论了对《宠儿》的评论,他把这部小说解释为一个真正的鬼故事,与读者的观点相反,他们强调死者的再现是莫里森用来表达创伤记忆的一种手段。是否《看不见的人》仅仅是一部与小众群体相关的小说,或者《宠儿》是否应该因过于奇幻而受到质疑,这些问题激起了读者的热情,并与他们对小说中种族和性别描写的反应有关。我还赞扬戈尔茨坦在接受过程中认识到并讨论了文学地位的地位,特别是公众认为莫里森和埃里森是描写重要主题的伟大作家,这常常迫使非学术读者接受这些作品,尽管它们很困难。通过这本书,我发现,尽管我们对接受研究的原则和价值完全一致,但我和戈尔茨坦对接受研究的目的并不相同。但是因为我一直被接待学习社和接待的跨学科、大帐篷的心态所吸引,所以我丝毫没有被吓倒。事实上,《接受研究的理论与实践》激发了我对接受如何在文学批评中发挥作用进行有意义的辩论。戈尔茨坦的书证明,在这个社会中,我们深思熟虑地重新审视并定期扩大我们领域的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Precious: Identity, Adaptation, and the African-American Youth Film by Katherine Whitehurst (review)
03/07/23 4:25 PM Reception_15_15_Book_Reviews.indd Page 139 03/07/23 4:25 PM reception 138 with obvious stakes for the literary standing of the works in the minds of readers. The chapter on Ellison’s Invisible Man reveals how some readers believed the novel illustrated the plight of Black men in general, and others found it only pertained to a certain subset of African Americans, whereas still others thought that certain aspects of the characters’ experience were universal. Goldstein discusses commentary on Beloved in a later chapter that interprets the novel as a literal ghost story, as opposed to the views of readers that emphasize that the reappearance of the dead was a device Morrison used to represent traumatic memories. Whether Invisible Man is merely a novel with relevance to a niche population or if Beloved should be discredited for being too fantastic are questions that stir readers’ passions—and correlate with their responses to depictions of race and gender in the fiction. I also commend Goldstein for recognizing and discussing the place of literary status in the reception process, notably the public perception of Morrison and Ellison as great writers on weighty subjects, which often compelled nonacademic readers to embrace these works despite their difficulty. I discovered through this book that Goldstein and I do not picture the same ends to reception study although we agree completely on its principles and value. But because I was always attracted to the cross-disciplinary, big tent mentality of the Reception Study Society and Reception, I am not deterred in the least. In fact, The Theory and Practice of Reception Study inspires me for keeping open meaningful debates about how reception should play a role in literary criticism. Goldstein’s book is proof that we in this society thoughtfully reexamine and regularly expand the capabilities of our field.
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
Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History
Reception-Texts Readers Audiences History HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Reception: Texts, Readers, Audiences, History is a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal published once a year. It seeks to promote dialog and discussion among scholars engaged in theoretical and practical analyses in several related fields: reader-response criticism and pedagogy, reception study, history of reading and the book, audience and communication studies, institutional studies and histories, as well as interpretive strategies related to feminism, race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, and postcolonial studies, focusing mainly but not exclusively on the literature, culture, and media of England and the United States.
×
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