0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Form at its Limits: Edward Said, Marxism, and the Valences of Critique

      , 1 , 2

      Open Library of Humanities

      Open Library of Humanities

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In his 1936 essay ‘Narrate or Describe’, György Lukács writes: ‘when a writer attempts as an observer and describer to achieve a comprehensive description, he must either reject any principle of selection, undertake an inexhaustible labour of Sisyphus or simply emphasize the picturesque and superficial aspects best adapted to description’. Nearly 80 years later, Bruno Latour would write that description is ‘the highest and rarest achievement’. However differently these two thinkers conceive of description, the passages above seem to mark the crux of a contemporary problem for literary studies. The recent groundswell of methodological polemics on the one hand (Rita Felski, Heather Love, Stephen Best and Sharon Marcus) and formal polemics on the other (Caroline Levine, Anna Kornbluh, W. J. T. Mitchell) appears to be symptomatic of an anxiety about literary studies more generally. We might best be able to capture this anxiety in the form of a question: what exactly is it that we—literary scholars—do? This article argues that the (re)turn to form and the turn to post-critique are of a shared moment and derive from this shared concern. Further, and perhaps most crucially, we argue that no amount of surface topography nor formal ingenuity will answer the question that undergirds both. Rather, we argue that it is an attention to form at its limits that will serve our contemporary moment. As such, we turn to the work of Edward Said as a case study for literary criticism and theory that anticipates these contemporary debates and suggests various ways forward.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Editor’s Note

           A Kornbluh (2016)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Form as Formalization In/Against Theory of the Novelty

             T. Eyers (2016)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Close but not Deep: Literary Ethics and the Descriptive Turn

               Heather Love (2010)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                2056-6700
                Open Library of Humanities
                Open Library of Humanities
                2056-6700
                20 July 2018
                2018
                : 4
                : 2
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Illinois-Chicago, US
                [2 ]Binghamton University, US
                Article
                10.16995/olh.241
                Copyright: © 2018 The Author(s)

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                Product
                Self URI (journal-page): https://olh.openlibhums.org/
                Categories
                What’s left? marxism, literature and culture in the 21st century

                Comments

                Comment on this article