Forms offers a powerful new answer to one of the most pressing problems facing literary, critical, and cultural studies today--how to connect form to political, social, and historical context. Caroline Levine argues that forms organize not only works of art but also political life--and our attempts to know both art and politics. Inescapable and frequently troubling, forms shape every aspect of our experience. But forms don't impose their order in any simple way. Multiple shapes, patterns, and arrangements, overlapping and colliding, generate complex and unpredictable social landscapes that challenge and unsettle conventional analytic models in literary and cultural studies.
Borrowing the concept of "affordances" from design theory, this book investigates the specific ways that four major forms--wholes, rhythms, hierarchies, and networks--have structured culture, politics, and scholarly knowledge across periods, and it proposes exciting new ways of linking formalism to historicism and literature to politics. Levine rereads both formalist and antiformalist theorists, including Cleanth Brooks, Michel Foucault, Jacques Rancière, Mary Poovey, and Judith Butler, and she offers engaging accounts of a wide range of objects, from medieval convents and modern theme parks to Sophocles's Antigone and the television series The Wire.
The result is a radically new way of thinking about form for the next generation and essential reading for scholars and students across the humanities who must wrestle with the problem of form and context.
0 有用 柯德莉蓝 2024-09-28 07:10:08 加拿大
introduction给人很大野心,但到后面越发cliche
0 有用 Rosedust 2024-10-17 06:34:43 美国
清楚但啰嗦,不無道理但難以操作
0 有用 之徽 2025-03-06 12:10:12 美国
关于forms的追问当然是有意义的(它可以是什么以及何种关于形式的研究才是更有效的),但可能Intro是最好的一部分…(Intro真的还蛮有用的!
0 有用 zhengtao 2021-11-16 11:52:03
lame
1 有用 蒂姆 2022-05-16 05:14:52
affordance的用法很有趣 但是whole那一章对于how new historicist scholarship in their attempt to reject a formalist reading betrays their reliance on a necessary formalism 真的很扯😂😂😂😂😂 真的很扯