Trauma and its often symptomatic aftermath pose acute problems for historical representation and understanding. In Writing History, Writing Trauma, Dominick LaCapra provides a broad-ranging, critical inquiry into the problem of trauma, notably with respect to major historical events. In a series of interlocking essays, he explores theoretical and literary-critical attempts to come to terms with trauma as well as the crucial role post-traumatic testimonies-particularly Holocaust testimonies-have assumed in recent thought and writing. In doing so, he adapts psychoanalytic concepts to historical analysis and employs sociocultural and political critique to elucidate trauma and its after effects in culture and in people. In the first chapter LaCapra addresses trauma from the perspective of history as a discipline. He then lays a theoretical groundwork for the book as a whole, exploring the concept of historical specificity and insisting on the difference between transhistorical and historical trauma. Subsequent chapters consider how Holocaust testimonies raise the problem of the role of affect and empathy in historical understanding, and respond to the debates surrounding Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's book Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. The book's concluding essay, "Writing (About) Trauma," examines the various ways that the voice of trauma emerges in written and oral accounts of historical events. Theoretically ambitious and historically informed, Writing History, Writing Trauma is an important contribution from one of today's foremost experts on trauma.
2 有用 Augers 2021-04-01 10:52:18
Lacapra写东西太密了,句式结构对读者太不友好。要不是我略过怀特和安克施密特,谁知道你在讲什么!!!(还是我拉垮)
2 有用 Alan 2015-03-24 13:24:18
高度理论化的一本书,主要关注trauma的记忆、历史书写,融入了很多精神分析理论,这书以后估计经常会返回来翻
2 有用 Henry Porter 2022-09-22 02:48:24 中国香港
实在是出乎预料的难读,就像中了埋伏那样的难读,真的只能抱着但求有所得的态度来读的难读,不过第二章值得重返,比起working through/acting out,absence/loss更是LaCapra在理论谱系中的标志,所以...是我们本来就不曾拥有乐园,只是我们幻想了乐园的失去,(为了)进而幻想复得,于是进而幻想出了城邦的污染者并将其驱逐,而这种替罪羊的逻辑一旦成立,从驱逐到湮灭这一看似很... 实在是出乎预料的难读,就像中了埋伏那样的难读,真的只能抱着但求有所得的态度来读的难读,不过第二章值得重返,比起working through/acting out,absence/loss更是LaCapra在理论谱系中的标志,所以...是我们本来就不曾拥有乐园,只是我们幻想了乐园的失去,(为了)进而幻想复得,于是进而幻想出了城邦的污染者并将其驱逐,而这种替罪羊的逻辑一旦成立,从驱逐到湮灭这一看似很大的跨越实际上只是一小步而已(我记得鲍曼是从军事与经济效益的角度来解读的这一跨越的),至于其他章节,更像是稍有新意的重申,这么频繁被提及的一部作品,竟然是我读到现在对我启发最小的一篇🫠 (展开)
3 有用 366日 2019-05-21 11:00:25
读不懂 脑壳痛
0 有用 晚凉天净 2016-04-26 13:24:23
必须放在语境里才能懂的一本书,得知道它跟谁对话。否则太抽象。
0 有用 Sophist 2024-06-05 13:50:38 北京
艰难在LaCapra简直不是英语的句子里找路走,仔细读了1 2 6三个章节,印象最深的还是他说paradise absent不同于paradise lost因为我们不曾拥有过paradise absent。很多不解之处,但能感觉到working through和acting out如何引向创伤在历史和个人空间中的存在。改编朋友的话来形容我读LaCapra的approach:有些地方逻辑已经无法到达... 艰难在LaCapra简直不是英语的句子里找路走,仔细读了1 2 6三个章节,印象最深的还是他说paradise absent不同于paradise lost因为我们不曾拥有过paradise absent。很多不解之处,但能感觉到working through和acting out如何引向创伤在历史和个人空间中的存在。改编朋友的话来形容我读LaCapra的approach:有些地方逻辑已经无法到达了,只能靠感觉连接起来… (展开)
0 有用 lac 2024-04-18 07:32:05 挪威
LaCapra最重要的贡献就是借用弗洛伊德的Mourning和Melancholia的概念区分了Working-through和Acting-out,也就是他认为之前的研究者都太过于关注trauma本身而没有寻求解决的方式。
0 有用 快洛小神仙 2023-10-26 12:27:04 广东
概念介绍太抽象且分散,组词造句像是生怕人看得懂,太多讨论一带而过,至少要让人大致了解你写的和你们讨论的是什么play吧😤
2 有用 Henry Porter 2022-09-22 02:48:24 中国香港
实在是出乎预料的难读,就像中了埋伏那样的难读,真的只能抱着但求有所得的态度来读的难读,不过第二章值得重返,比起working through/acting out,absence/loss更是LaCapra在理论谱系中的标志,所以...是我们本来就不曾拥有乐园,只是我们幻想了乐园的失去,(为了)进而幻想复得,于是进而幻想出了城邦的污染者并将其驱逐,而这种替罪羊的逻辑一旦成立,从驱逐到湮灭这一看似很... 实在是出乎预料的难读,就像中了埋伏那样的难读,真的只能抱着但求有所得的态度来读的难读,不过第二章值得重返,比起working through/acting out,absence/loss更是LaCapra在理论谱系中的标志,所以...是我们本来就不曾拥有乐园,只是我们幻想了乐园的失去,(为了)进而幻想复得,于是进而幻想出了城邦的污染者并将其驱逐,而这种替罪羊的逻辑一旦成立,从驱逐到湮灭这一看似很大的跨越实际上只是一小步而已(我记得鲍曼是从军事与经济效益的角度来解读的这一跨越的),至于其他章节,更像是稍有新意的重申,这么频繁被提及的一部作品,竟然是我读到现在对我启发最小的一篇🫠 (展开)
2 有用 Augers 2021-04-01 10:52:18
Lacapra写东西太密了,句式结构对读者太不友好。要不是我略过怀特和安克施密特,谁知道你在讲什么!!!(还是我拉垮)