Search results

You are looking at 11 - 20 of 128 items for :

  • phenomenology x
  • Literature and Theatre x
Clear All
Abstract only
Historicism, whither wilt?
Christopher D’Addario

increasing effort to reassert the unique complexities of literary texts, to identify their distinctive aesthetic and phenomenological effects on readers. New Formalism has embodied perhaps the most prominent and direct reaction to New Historicist notions of textuality; however, critics working in the areas of cognitive science, neuro-aesthetics, the ethics of reading, affect theory, and historical phenomenology have similarly turned their attention to the precise workings of imaginative writing, the ways in which literary texts radically reorganise perception, or else

in Texts and readers in the Age of Marvell
Ghosts and the busy nothing in Footfalls
Stephen Thomson

reconstruction. To put it rather tersely, MerleauPonty’s phenomenology does not believe there is anything beyond Plato’s cave and its shadowplay. He does occasionally entertain concepts such as a ‘primordial silence’, but only so as to set up a notional final backdrop against which the apparent silence of ‘pure thought’ may be revealed as a thoroughly linguistic hubbub (‘bruissant de paroles’) of ready-made phrases that form the ‘fond obscur’ of language.46 Read with a certain bias of attention, then, phenomenology’s account of our relation to this factitious nothing, which

in Beckett and nothing
Mark Robson

Madness , Jean Khalfa speaks of the nature of Foucault’s move from phenomenology to structuralism, seeing his treatment of madness as indicative of that methodological shift. Unlike the majority of those who have tackled madness as a topic, says Khalfa, Foucault does not write the history of a disease: Rather, in

in Foucault’s theatres
Max Silverman

universalising language and culture of the European master are the traps posed Reflections on the human question 115 for the colonial subject whose own culture is devalued when measured against the values of ‘humanity’. It is true that Fanon and Lévi-Strauss arrive at this position via different routes. Fanon comes to the critique of the West via the route of personal experience in Martinique and then metropolitan France, the Negritude writers and Sartrean phenomenology, while LéviStrauss comes to it via the developing awareness among western anthropologists and

in Frantz Fanon’s 'Black Skin, White Masks
Paul Strohm

want to argue that such imaginary relations – relations of ‘fandom’, as it were – are a frequent if unacknowledged component of literary enjoyment, and I want to think further about whether the formation of such relations might have any defensible elements at all. That is, might one discover an intellectually coherent aspect of this debunked practice? I want to weigh two possible forms of identification with an author: one involving some extremely preliminary thoughts about the author-in-the text and the phenomenology of textual encounter, and the other involving the

in Contemporary Chaucer across the centuries
‘The Platonic differential’ and ‘Zarathustra’s laughter’
Mischa Twitchin

return of tragedy, of Dionysus contra Socrates, explored by different participants in the College of Sociology? Is there, perhaps, an echo of philosophical laughter in this old-new knowledge (or ‘science’) of phantasms, at least in its difference from phenomenology? The repressed of metaphysics has taken many names, so that now ‘phantasmaphysics’ itself seems to have as

in Foucault’s theatres
Sara Ahmed

). Ahmed, S. (2014c). ‘Practical phenomenology’, (4 June), https://​​2014/​06/​04/​practical-​phenomenology/​ (accessed 3 September 2018). Ahmed, S. (2014d). ‘Hard’, (10 June), https://​feministkilljoys. com/​2014/​06/​10/​hard/​ (accessed 3 September 2018). Ahmed, S. (2014e). ‘Fragility’, (14 June), https://​feministkilljoys. com/​2014/​06/​14/​fragility/​ (accessed 3 September 2018). Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a Feminist Life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Braidotti, R. (2006

in The power of vulnerability
Olson on history, in dialogue
Sarah Posman

Goethe.’8 Less vehemently than Olson’s aversion to logic and classification – which in ‘Human Universe’ the poet considered tools bequeathed by the Greeks that, by the twentieth century, have become habits of thought ‘absolutely interfere[ing]’ with action – Curtius nonetheless criticizes the discipline of literary history and the ‘catalogue-like knowledge of facts’ by which it proceeds (CPr, 156).9 Instead of mining the literary past for facts and details, he proposes that literary scholars engage in a ‘phenomenology of literature’.10 By his account, the future of

in Contemporary Olson
Fanon’s response to Sartre
Robert Bernasconi

, elsewhere in Peau noire Fanon underwrites the view that Whites cannot understand Louis Armstrong (Peau noire: 36; Black Skin: 45). I shall argue in this paper that Fanon’s considered opinion, which today might be understood as a version of standpoint theory or the epistemology of provenance, but which was in its own time developed by him in terms of existential phenomenology, is that ‘l’Européen sait et ne sait pas’ (‘The European knows and he does not know’) (Peau noire: 161; Black Skin: 199). The original title of Peau noire, Essai sur la désaliénation du Noir (Cheriki

in Frantz Fanon’s 'Black Skin, White Masks
Abstract only
Patrick Duggan

the theatrical object, Chapter 5 turns more to the audience experience. From a definition of witnessing that primarily focused on ‘theoretical’ and ‘therapeutic’ conceptions, this chapter uses Karen Malpede (1996) and Simon Shepherd (2006) as starting points in a discussion of the kinaesthetic, visceral, phenomenological impact of witnessing, both ‘in general’ and specifically at the theatre. Employing the philosophy of (theatre) phenomenology as well as scientific theories of bodily perception/reception and Kristeva’s semiosis, this chapter examines three distinct

in Trauma-tragedy