注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

张在新

John Zaixin Zhang

 
 
 

日志

 
 

Questions for Weekly Discussions about Tyson’s Critical Theory Today (Weeks 3-4)  

2018-01-30 15:07:00|  分类: +文论 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-friendly Guide. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2006. (洛伊丝·泰森:《当代批评理论实用指南》(第二版),赵国新等译。北京:外研社,2014)

Questions for Weekly Discussions about Tyson’s Critical Theory Today

Weeks 3-4: Feminism

1.  Are women marginalized in their traditional gender roles?

2.  How would you evaluate materialist feminism and psychoanalytic feminism (both in the French school of feminism)?

3.  How do we understand Kristeva’s notion of the semiotic (in the Lacanian Imaginary Order), in the contrast between scientific discourse and poetic language (Tyson 103-4)? Is there any ambiguity or misconception in Tyson’s discussion about it? How would this discussion tie in with those we’ve had before, about the Real and objet petit a?

4.  What is écriture feminine? Elaborate on the following quote from Tyson:

[……] she [Cixous] argues that, as the source of life, women are themselves the source of power, of energy. We therefore need a new, feminine language that undermines or eliminates the patriarchal binary thinking that oppresses and silences women. This kind of language, which Cixous believes best expresses itself in writing, is called écriture féminine (feminine writing). It is fluidly organized and freely associative. It resists patriarchal modes of thinking and writing, which generally require prescribed, “correct” methods of organization, rationalist rules of logic (logic that stays “above the neck,” relying on narrow definitions of cognitive experience and discrediting many kinds of emotional and intuitive experience), and linear reasoning (x precedes y, which precedes z). (100-1)

5.  Why did Tyson literally translate “écriture feminine” into English as “feminine writing,” rather than “feminist writing”?

6.  What do you think of gynocriticism? In what way is women’s writing related to the female author (as demonstrated in Anglo-American feminism, in Elaine Showalter’s work for example)? Is the literary text necessarily gender-specific? Does the signifier (literary text) have to correspond to the signified (female author and/or her socio-historical status)? Consider what Tyson says about it:

“The questions that follow are offered to summarize feminist approaches to literature. Approaches that attempt to develop a specifically female framework for the analysis of women’s writing (such as questions 6, 7, and 8) are often referred to as gynocriticism” (119).

[……]

6. What does the work suggest about women’s creativity? In order to answer this question, biographical data about the author and historical data about the culture in which she lived will be required.

7. What might an examination of the author’s style contribute to the ongoing efforts to delineate a specifically feminine form of writing (for example, écriture féminine)?

8. What role does the work play in terms of women’s literary history and literary tradition? (120)

7. Is there any difference between “écriture feminine” and “gynocriticism”? Tyson seems to have used the two terms interchangeably (see her Question 7 above).

  评论这张
 
阅读(35)| 评论(0)
推荐

历史上的今天

在LOFTER的更多文章

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2018