Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:10:09.680Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

That's Close Enough: The Unfinished History of Emotivism in Close Reading

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Tristram Wolff
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

By giving a brief history of emotivism in close reading, this article offers a new context for understanding the contemporary uneasiness about close reading and about the proliferating array of alternative kinds of reading it has prompted. Emotivism refers to the subcurrent of linguistic thought that shaped the institutional formation of New Critical closeness by distinguishing propositional from emotive meaning. Instead of amending our closeness to texts by dispensing with critique, or focusing on surfaces and description to the exclusion of textual depth, either of which might inadvertently encourage new kinds of emotivism, this article suggests we bear in mind—as the conversation goes on—the mid-century counteremotivist critics, such as Kenneth Burke, who advocated a kind of reading attuned to the interactive processes held in apparent stasis by literary form.

Type
Special Topic: Cultures of Reading
Information
PMLA , Volume 134 , Issue 1: Special Topic Cultures of Reading , January 2019 , pp. 51 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Anderson, Dana, and Enoch, Jessica, editors. Burke in the Archives: Using the Past to Transform the Future of Burkean Studies. U of South Carolina P, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, Stephen, and Marcus, Sharon. “Surface Reading: An Introduction”. Representations, vol. 108, no. 1, Fall 2009, pp. 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bewes, Timothy. “Reading with the Grain: A New World in Literary Criticism”. Differences, vol. 21, no. 3, 2010, pp. 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, Wayne C. “Kenneth Burke's Way of Knowing”. Critical Inquiry, vol. 1, no. 1, Sept. 1974, pp. 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, Timothy. Borrowed Light: Vico, Hegel, and the Colonies. Stanford UP, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Cleanth. The Well Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry. Harcourt, Brace, 1947.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. Permanence and Change: An Anatomy of Purpose. 1935. U of California P, 1984.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. The Philosophy of Literary Form. 1941. U of California P, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. A Rhetoric of Motives. 1950. U of California P, 1974. Butler, Judith. Senses of the Subject. Fordham UP, 2015.Google Scholar
Cavell, Stanley. Foreword. The Scandal of the Speaking Body: Don Juan with J.L. Austin; or, Seduction in Two Languages, by Shoshana Felman, translated by Porter, Catherine, Stanford UP, 2002, pp. xi-xxi.Google Scholar
Cavell, Stanley. Philosophy the Day after Tomorrow. Harvard UP, 2005.Google Scholar
Clark, Gregory. Civic Jazz: American Music and Kenneth Burke on the Art of Getting Along. U of Chicago P, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberle. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist heory and Antiracist Politics.” University of Chicago Legal Forum, vol. 1989, no. 1, pp. 139–67.Google Scholar
De Man, Paul. Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism. U of Minnesota P, 1983.Google Scholar
Denning, Michael. The Cultural Front: The Laboring of American Culture in the Twentieth Century. Verso, 1998.Google Scholar
Empson, William. The Structure of Complex Words. U of Michigan P, 1967.Google Scholar
Felski, Rita. The Limits of Critique. U of Chicago P, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Florence, P. Sargant, and Anderson, J.R.L., editors. C.K. Ogden: A Collective Memoir. Elek Pemberton, 1977.Google Scholar
François, Anne-Lise. “‘Untouched by Morning -/And Untouched by Noon -‘: Succession without Sequel”. European Romantic Review, vol. 23, no. 3, June 2012, pp. 319–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, Catherine. “he History of Literary Criticism”. Daedalus, vol. 126, no. 1, Winter 1997, pp. 133–53.Google Scholar
Gallop, Jane. “he Historicization of Literary Studies and the Fate of Close Reading.” Profession, 2007, pp. 181–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gang, Joshua. “Behaviorism and the Beginnings of Close Reading.” ELH, vol. 78, no. 1, Spring 2011, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
George, Ann, and Selzer, Jack. Kenneth Burke in the 1930s. U of South Carolina P, 2007.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective”. Feminist Studies, vol. 14, no. 3, Autumn 1988, pp. 575–99.Google Scholar
Harrison, Ross. Bentham. Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983.Google Scholar
Hawhee, Debra. Moving Bodies: Kenneth Burke at the Edges of Language. U of South Carolina P, 2009.Google Scholar
Hazlitt, William. The Spirit of the Age. Wordsworth Trust, 2004.Google Scholar
Lacan, Jacques. The Ethics of Psychoanalysis, 1959–1960. Edited by Jacques-Alain Miller, translated by Dennis Porter, Routledge, 2008. Bk. 7 of The Seminar of Jacques Lacan.Google Scholar
Lentricchia, Frank. Criticism and Social Change. U of Chicago P, 1983.Google Scholar
Levinson, Marjorie. “What Is New Formalism?” PMLA, vol. 122, no. 2, Mar. 2007, pp. 558–69.Google Scholar
Love, Heather. “Close but Not Deep: Literary Ethics and the Descriptive Turn”. New Literary History, no. 41, 2010, pp. 371–91.Google Scholar
Miller, D.A. “Hitchcock's Understyle: A Too-Close View of Rope”. Representations, vol. 121, no. 1, Winter 2013, pp. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogden, C.K. Introduction. Bentham's Theory of Fictions, by Bentham, Jeremy, Kegan Paul, 1932, pp. ix-cli.Google Scholar
Ogden, C.K., and Richards, I.A. The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. 10th ed., Harcourt, Brace, 1952.Google Scholar
@PanoptiStream. Twitter, twitter.com/panoptistream.Google Scholar
Ransom, John Crowe. “Criticism, Inc”. Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism: A Reader, edited by David Lodge Longman, 1972, pp. 228–40.Google Scholar
Richards, I.A. “Co-author of the ‘Meaning of Meaning’: Some Recollections of C.K. Ogden.” Florence and Anderson, pp. 96–109.Google Scholar
Richards, I.A. Practical Criticism: A Study of Literary Judgment. Harcourt, Brace, 1929.Google Scholar
Scott, Joan W. “he Evidence of Experience”. Critical Inquiry, vol. 17, no. 4, Summer 1991, pp. 773–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedgwick, Eve. “Paranoid Reading and Reparative Reading; or, You're So Paranoid, You Probably Think This Essay Is about You” Touching Feeling: Affect, Performativity, Pedagogy, Duke UP, 2003, pp. 123–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. “From the Meaning of Meaning to the Empires of the Mind: Ogden's Orthological English”. Pragmatics, vol. 5, no. 2, 1995, pp. 185–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. “Modern Prophets of Language.” Unpublished MS.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. “Shifters, Linguistic Categories, and Cultural Description”. Meaning in Anthropology, edited by Basso, Keith and Selby, H.A., Harper and Row, 1976, pp. 11–55.Google Scholar
Simon, David Carroll. Light without Heat: The Observational Mood from Bacon to Milton. Cornell UP, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terada, Rei. Feeling in Theory: Emotion after the Death of the Subject. Harvard UP, 2001.Google Scholar
Warner, Michael. “Uncritical Reading”. Polemic: Critical or Uncritical, edited by Gallop, Jane, Routledge, 2004, pp. 13–38.Google Scholar
Weiser, M. Elizabeth. Burke, War, Words: Rhetoricizing Dramatism. U of South Carolina P, 2008.Google Scholar
Wellek, René. “he New Criticism: Pro and Contra”. Critical Inquiry, vol. 4, no. 4, Summer 1978, pp. 611–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Raymond. Culture and Society, 1780–1950. Columbia UP, 1958.Google Scholar
Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Oxford UP, 1976.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.K., and Beardsley, Monroe C. “he Affective Fallacy.” The Verbal Icon, UP of Kentucky, 1954, pp. 21–40. Originally published in The Sewanee Review, vol. 57, no. 1, Winter 1949, pp. 31–55.Google Scholar
Wu, Duncan. William Hazlitt: Te First Modern Man. Oxford UP, 2008.Google Scholar
Yousef, Nancy. Romantic Intimacy. Stanford UP, 2013.Google Scholar