首页> 外文学位 >The mirror in the marketplace: Subjectivity in late-Medieval English culture (Geoffrey Chaucer, John Lydgate, Thomas Hoccleve).
【24h】

The mirror in the marketplace: Subjectivity in late-Medieval English culture (Geoffrey Chaucer, John Lydgate, Thomas Hoccleve).

机译:市场上的一面镜子:中世纪晚期英国文化的主观性(Geoffrey Chaucer,John Lydgate,Thomas Hoccleve)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The privileged place of individualism in medieval literary and cultural criticism has obscured some of the most distinctive features of fifteenth-century culture. Chaucer and his early fifteenth-century imitators John Lydgate and Thomas Hoccleve insistently problematize the individualist ethics that historicist criticism presents as exemplary of the interest and value of late medieval English literature. For all three writers, the mobility and autonomy created by economic growth were sources not of liberation but of profound anxiety. Though they write in a variety of genres, all three address what they see as a crisis precipitated by the collapse of individual identity and social relations structured by the feudal ideology of sovereignty. They see the marketplace not in terms of the autonomy it made possible but in terms of the new problems of defining the nature of relations between autonomous individuals, the archetype of which has become economic exchange. The poets' response to this crisis was not to affirm a conservative social vision, a return to an imagined golden age of feudalism, but to redefine sovereignty itself, displacing it from the body of the king to a “grammar” of social and economic relations in the public sphere. Self-invention, while it was in some sense a liberating force, was for the fifteenth century primarily a mode of self-governance, a necessary way of preserving collective existence in an age of nascent economic individualism. The New Historicist tendency to celebrate this individualism distorts the fifteenth-century sense that the problem of subjectivity is precisely that of locating an authority in relation to which individuals can be subjects, and thus distorts the important ways in which the fifteenth century speaks to our own post-industrial anxieties about the nature of the individual.
机译:个人主义在中世纪文学和文化批评中的特权地位掩盖了15世纪文化的一些最鲜明特征。乔uc和他的15世纪早期模仿者约翰·利德盖特(John Lydgate)和托马斯·霍克洛夫(Thomas Hoccleve)坚持质疑个人主义伦理学,而历史主义批评将这种个人主义伦理学视为中世纪晚期英国文学的兴趣和价值的典范。对于所有三位作家来说,经济增长所带来的流动性和自主性不是解放的根源,而是深深的焦虑。尽管他们用不同的体裁写作,但所有这三个人都将他们视为由主权封建意识形态造成的个人身份和社会关系崩溃而引发的危机。他们认为,市场不是根据其可能实现的自治,而是根据新的问题来定义自治个人之间的关系的性质,这种原型已成为经济交流。诗人对这场危机的反应不是要确认保守的社会视野,重回封建主义的黄金时代,而是要重新定义主权本身,将主权从国王的身体转移到社会和经济关系的“语法”上在公共领域。自我发明虽然在某种意义上是一种解放力量,但在十五世纪主要是一种自我管理的模式,这是在新生的经济个人主义时代保持集体存在的一种必要方式。新历史主义者倾向于这种个人主义的倾向扭曲了十五世纪的观念,即主观性问题恰恰是定位与个人有关的权威的问题,从而扭曲了十五世纪对我们自己说话的重要方式后工业界对个人本质的担忧。

著录项

  • 作者

    Fewer, Colin D.;

  • 作者单位

    The Pennsylvania State University.;

  • 授予单位 The Pennsylvania State University.;
  • 学科 Literature Medieval.; Literature English.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2001
  • 页码 208 p.
  • 总页数 208
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 世界文学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号