Die Rückkehr der ›Gesellschaft‹ in die Kulturwissenschaft

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-52
Author(s):  
Ursula Peters

Abstract Coinciding with the cultural turn in the humanities, a critical discussion in literary studies has begun in recent years that relates to the problems of rejecting social questions and an associated turning away from social history. Against the backdrop of this debate, my research report offers an overview of the conceptual possibilities and methodological problems in a ›return of society‹ within medieval philology. This is based on three established research areas of socio-historical literary studies: postcolonial literary criticism, literary ecocriticism and literary economics.

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-79
Author(s):  
A. Mustoyapova ◽  

The article describes the types of latest research presented in foreign literary studies at the beginning of the XXIst century. The аuthor focuses on the formation of such critical approaches as cognitive criticism, Darwinian criticism, ecocriticism, human and animal studies. The author focuses on the problems of literature at the beginning of the XXIst century, which are closely related to the latest achievements in neurobiology, cognitive science, environmental and evolution issues. A review of the modern foreign researcher’s works allows us to conclude that they are related to poststructuralist, postmodern, evolutionistic and actor-network theories. The significance of these critical approaches is determined by the fact that they are relevant and applicable for not only literary analysis and literary criticism, but also for research in sociology, psychology and in the field of interdisciplinary research.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 146-152
Author(s):  
Almaz Ulvi Bi̇nnatova ◽  

The research work named “From the history of scientific-theoretical research of Alisher Navoi’s heritage (on the pages of Azerbaijani literature and literary criticism)” was grouped in several directions. In the systematic research within the sections named - 1. “The influence of Alisher Navoiy’s creativity on Azerbaijani literature”, 2. “The influence of Azerbaijani literature on the creativity of Alisher Navoiy”, 3. “Studying of Alisher Navoiy’s legacy in Azerbaijani literary studies


PMLA ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 129 (3) ◽  
pp. 498-503
Author(s):  
Simon During

Postcolonialism emerged as a field within literary studies during the 1980s as part of the discipline's general restructuring. That restructuring has, perhaps, been insufficiently acknowledged by the profession, and at any rate there seems to be little consensus as to its significance and shape. But it seems undeniable that, during the 1980s, literary criticism ceased to ground itself on its attention to its objects' literary qualities or on its efforts to establish convincing literary judgments about them. It turned rather to thinking about literature as, for instance, a vehicle of cultural-political identities, or as a resistance to ideology, or, more neutrally, as articulated into broader signifying or social structures.


1986 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 149-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Landers ◽  
Stephen H. Boutcher ◽  
Min Q. Wang

In the past 7 years JSP has evolved to become a respected sport psychology journal. The journal has been uncompromising in the strong research posture it has taken. It is currently the only journal entirely devoted to sport psychology that uses a single set of criteria for evaluating the scientific merit of submitted manuscripts. Over this time period the submitted manuscripts have shown an increase in the number of female principal authors as well as authors being affiliated with departments other than physical education. Survey studies were the most common submittals, but lately there has been a greater emphasis in field experimental studies. Some potential problem areas are noted in subject selection and choice of statistical tests. An examination of research areas revealed that in recent years "motivation" was the most frequently submitted topic. It appeared that other research areas varied in terms of their publishability. The common methodological problems associated with rejection of these types of manuscripts are discussed.


2021 ◽  

The civil war between Charles I and his parliament broke out in England in 1642; rebellions were already underway in Scotland from 1637, and in Ireland from 1641. The conflict culminated with the trial and execution of the king in 1649. Through the 1650s Britain was governed as a republic, then as a Protectorate under Oliver Cromwell from 1653. But the regime unraveled after Cromwell’s death in 1658, ultimately leading to the Restoration of monarchy under Charles II in 1660. The civil wars were fought on the page as intensely as on the battlefield, producing an outpouring of rich and diverse literature, including (to barely scratch the surface): the poetry and prose of John Milton, Andrew Marvell, the cavalier poets, Katherine Philips, Margaret Cavendish, Lucy Hutchinson, Gerrard Winstanley, Thomas Hobbes, the Earl of Clarendon, Marchamont Nedham. This vibrant and important body of writing was, for much of the 20th century, neglected and poorly understood. The closure of the theaters in 1642, the collapse of royal court culture, and a critical fashion that dismissed writing sullied by political engagement: these factors all produced the illusion of a hiatus in the literary tradition, a “cavalier winter.” These misplaced assumptions, however, have been overturned since the 1980s by a new wave of scholarly interest, galvanized by a renewed recognition of the value and excitement of politically engaged writing. Scholarship informed by different branches of historicism, combining literary criticism variously with New Historicism, with the history of political thought, with social history, and with book history, have all transformed our appreciation of civil war literature. As such, work by historicist critics—and by historians—is inescapably central to this bibliography, and fundamental to our understanding of the period’s literature. But, as will become apparent, plenty of space remains for a diversity of approaches including gender studies, queer studies, critical theory, reception studies, and formalism. This bibliography is organized thematically, rather than around major individual authors, of whom there are many, most of whom appear in multiple sections. For this reason, no attempt has been made to include scholarly editions, though reader-friendly anthologies are listed, many of which make valuable scholarly contributions. Key studies on politics and literature appear in Literature and Politics: Essential Studies, followed by more focused sections on royalism, cavalier poetry, republicanism, and Cromwellian writing. Other sections cover scholarship on printing and pamphleteering, on radicalism, on women’s writing, on gender and sexuality, on drama, and on international and colonial contexts.


Author(s):  
David Hershinow

In this book, I have tried to show that it is only with the rise of dramatic realism that the figure of the Cynic truth-teller begins to provoke sustained interpretive crisis, a crisis that takes shape in the sixteenth century and that goes on to drive key developments in our literary, philosophical and political history. Through my readings of Shakespeare’s plays, I have also tried to show that literature – along with its academic offspring, literary criticism – is uniquely positioned to diagnose the interpretive errors that consequently underwrite philosophical and political ideas about the means of achieving extreme critical agency. What these two overarching aims have in common is the critical methodology I develop in order to advance them, and I conclude this book by briefly commenting on the value this method holds for early modern studies in particular and for the discipline of literary studies in general....


PMLA ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 127 (3) ◽  
pp. 607-616
Author(s):  
Cheryll Glotfelty ◽  
Michelle Balaev

The classic anthology the ecocriticism reader: landmarks in literary ecology (1996), edited by cheryll glotfelty and Harold Fromm, was the first of its kind to bring together an array of scholarship that focused on a relatively unrecognized field of study: ecocriticism. This singular publication was the brainchild of Glotfelty, who worked with Fromm to produce a collection that stands at the gates of our contemporary era as a harbinger of the significant criticism and curricula that would shape literary studies in English departments across the country. The Ecocriticism Reader accompanied a new wave of interest in the field as seen in contemporaneous publications such as Karl Kroeber's Ecological Literary Criticism (1994) and Lawrence Buell's The Environmental Imagination (1995).


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Patrick Fessenbecker

How did “reading for the message,” a mark of shame among literary critics, yet in many ways an ordinary reading practice, become so marginalized? The origins of this methodological commitment ultimately are intertwined with the birth of literary studies itself . The influential aestheticist notion of “art for art’s sake” has several implications crucial for understanding the intellectual history of literary criticism in the twentieth century: most important was the belief that to “extract” an idea from a text was to dismiss its aesthetic structure. This impulse culminated in the New Critical contention that to paraphrase a text was a “heresy.” Yet this dominant tradition has always co-existed with practical interpretation that was much less formalist in emphasis. A return to the world of American literary criticism in 1947, when Cleanth Brooks’s The Well-Wrought Urn was published, shows this clearly: many now-forgotten critics were already practicing a form of criticism that emphasized literary content, and often overly rejecting Brooks’s insistence that reading for the content or meaning of a poem betrayed its aesthetic nature.


2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Kucich

Historicism remains relatively robust in Victorian Studies, but it has developed rather quietly in two contrary directions – synchronic and diachronic – that have long constituted an important theoretical fault line. The first half of this essay surveys these two ongoing types of Victorian historicism and urges the importance of integrating them; the second defends historicism from a recent theoretical movement that deflects attention from that potential integration: the critique of ‘suspicious reading’. The essay focuses on general methodological issues that affect how we defend humanistic scholarship, since historicism's continued development remains vital not only to Victorianists but to the discipline as a whole. While historicism has been both enormously reinvigorating and much contested, by friend and foe alike, the tectonic shift in our critical practice that it represents has never crystallized a simple, coherent set of principles that might define the mission of literary studies within the humanities. Although there are many ways to justify literary criticism, historicism will always be centrally entwined with them. Affirming the role suspicious reading plays in historical contextualization and clarifying the methodologies and objectives of historicism are thus tasks that still lie urgently before us.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document