首页> 外文学位 >The Personal Rule: Pope, Hume, and literary theory.
【24h】

The Personal Rule: Pope, Hume, and literary theory.

机译:个人规则:教皇,休ume和文学理论。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

One of the problems facing literary theory today is the extent to which people's social and cultural identities individuate them. "The Personal Rule" argues that since its invention in a recognizably proto-modern, secular form in the eighteenth century, literary theory has possessed a warrant for fitting personal experience together with conventional, typical meanings. This warrant draws its power from the early history of literary formalism, especially from poetic and philosophical ambivalence towards the emerging notion that a work of art is autonomous--not of its social and political contexts, but of its origins. Versions of this notion begin to appear in John Dryden's later criticism (1680-1700) and are clearly in place in his "Preface to the Fables" (1700). We can find it in both John Dennis's and Samuel Johnson's writings on works by Shakespeare and Pope (indeed for both critics, Pope's failure to give his poems the meaning he intended is the great theme of his career), and in Pope's own writings on Homer. Among the many consequences of aesthetic autonomy, I focus on how writers wonder whether personal aesthetic responses, and even personal identities, can similarly unhinge from the persons having them. Both Alexander Pope and David Hume explore the relation between a person and her attributes, seeking paradoxically to justify a connection between them on the grounds that the "personal" is formal, artificial, and indeed powerfully literary. Yet neither author finds much to celebrate in this configuration of ideas, realizing that little separates the formally artificial from the merely fake. Nevertheless a recognition of the historical power of criticism's warrant for putting people and meaning together might complicate attempts to divorce a literary theory of identity from the literary as such.
机译:当今文学理论面临的问题之一是人们的社会和文化身份在多大程度上将其个性化。 “个人规则”认为,自从18世纪以公认的原始现代世俗形式发明了文学理论以来,文学理论就具有将个人经验与传统的典型含义相结合的必要条件。这份授权书的力量来自于文学形式主义的早期历史,尤其是从诗意和哲学上的矛盾之处,到新兴的观念-艺术品是自主的-不是其社会和政治背景,而是其起源。此概念的版本开始出现在约翰·德莱顿(John Dryden)的后期批评(1680-1700)中,并且显然存在于他的“寓言序言”(1700)中。我们可以在约翰·丹尼斯(John Dennis)和塞缪尔·约翰逊(Samuel Johnson)的莎士比亚和波普的著作中找到它(这对两位批评家来说,教皇都没有给他的诗赋予他的意图是他职业生涯的重要主题),以及在教皇自己关于荷马的著作中。在审美自治的许多后果中,我关注的是作家如何思考个人的审美反应,甚至个人身份,是否可以同样地从拥有它们的人身上摆脱出来。亚历山大·波普和大卫·休ume都探索了一个人与她的属性之间的关系,以“个人”是形式,虚假的,而且确实是有力的文学作品为依据,自相矛盾地试图证明它们之间的联系是正当的。然而,没有一个作者在这种思想构架中找到很多值得庆祝的东西,意识到很少有人将形式上的人为与假货区分开。然而,承认批评使人们和意义融为一体的历史力量的历史力量,可能会使将一种身份认同理论与文学本身分离的尝试变得复杂。

著录项

  • 作者

    Vermeule, Emily Blake.;

  • 作者单位

    University of California, Berkeley.;

  • 授予单位 University of California, Berkeley.;
  • 学科 Literature English.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1995
  • 页码 346 p.
  • 总页数 346
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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