東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Anti-professionalism, pluralism and ...

Hastings, Howard.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Anti-professionalism, pluralism and the problem of critical authority: An inquiry into the disciplinary structure and logic of English.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Anti-professionalism, pluralism and the problem of critical authority: An inquiry into the disciplinary structure and logic of English./
作者:	Hastings, Howard.
面頁冊數:	713 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-11, Section: A, page: 4014.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International66-11A.
標題:	Literature, General. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3193336
ISBN:	9780542379529

Anti-professionalism, pluralism and the problem of critical authority: An inquiry into the disciplinary structure and logic of English.
Hastings, Howard.

Anti-professionalism, pluralism and the problem of critical authority: An inquiry into the disciplinary structure and logic of English. - 713 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-11, Section: A, page: 4014.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--George Mason University, 2005.

Cultural Studies has traditionally posed the form and organization of disciplines within modern research universities as itself a problem for critical practice, particularly the manner in which individual disciplines define fields and objects of research in conformity to a larger, unexamined logic of institutional organization whose knowledge production is also the reproduction of a specific national culture. In this dissertation, however, I argue that current accounts of disciplinarity which emphasize the hierarchical and exclusionary character of disciplinary knowledge are inadequate to explain the expansive and inclusive tendencies of humanities disciplines such English, which require more the constant incorporation of new methodologies and subject areas in search of fresh perspectives than a steady accumulation of bounded, retrievable knowledge. My inquiry first reviews recent debates over the nature of professionalism in English which have attended its assimilation of deconstruction, feminism, and Cultural Studies, to foreground a structural contradiction arising from the accommodation of literary texts valued as the expression of uniquely individual and privatized experience to the requirements of disciplinary knowledge production. The remainder then examines the genesis of this contradiction by turning to the historical development of English, especially its emergence in nineteenth-century U.S. universities, where displacement of the traditional classical curriculum by an elective, and the evolution of a pluralist system of formally equal, departmentalized disciplines, radically altered the conditions under which cultural artifacts, especially texts, could circulate with authority. As English professionals negotiated the boundaries of their field with neighboring disciplines, the pre-disciplinary construction of English as object of rhetoric grounded in common sense epistemology and ideals of stylistic perspicuity was recast in a form amenable to routine research, in part by an adaptation of positivist methodology to literary criticism emphasizing literary form to stabilize critical authority. By the mid-twentieth century, in the context of a now thoroughly monolinguistic criticism, this formalist emphasis enabled a methodological pluralism adaptable to other fields and subject matters, becoming one condition for emergence of U.S. Cultural Studies. I close with speculation as to how the structural contradictions and monocultural tendencies of disciplinary English may carry into Cultural Studies as well.

ISBN: 9780542379529Subjects--Topical Terms:

1018152
Literature, General.

Anti-professionalism, pluralism and the problem of critical authority: An inquiry into the disciplinary structure and logic of English.
LDR:03563nmm 2200313 4500 001 1823048
005 20061130093107.5
008 130610s2005 eng d
020 $a 9780542379529
035 $a (UnM)AAI3193336
035 $a AAI3193336
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Hastings, Howard. $3 1912173
245 1 0 $a Anti-professionalism, pluralism and the problem of critical authority: An inquiry into the disciplinary structure and logic of English.
300 $a 713 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-11, Section: A, page: 4014.
500 $a Director: Paul H. Smith.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--George Mason University, 2005.
520 $a Cultural Studies has traditionally posed the form and organization of disciplines within modern research universities as itself a problem for critical practice, particularly the manner in which individual disciplines define fields and objects of research in conformity to a larger, unexamined logic of institutional organization whose knowledge production is also the reproduction of a specific national culture. In this dissertation, however, I argue that current accounts of disciplinarity which emphasize the hierarchical and exclusionary character of disciplinary knowledge are inadequate to explain the expansive and inclusive tendencies of humanities disciplines such English, which require more the constant incorporation of new methodologies and subject areas in search of fresh perspectives than a steady accumulation of bounded, retrievable knowledge. My inquiry first reviews recent debates over the nature of professionalism in English which have attended its assimilation of deconstruction, feminism, and Cultural Studies, to foreground a structural contradiction arising from the accommodation of literary texts valued as the expression of uniquely individual and privatized experience to the requirements of disciplinary knowledge production. The remainder then examines the genesis of this contradiction by turning to the historical development of English, especially its emergence in nineteenth-century U.S. universities, where displacement of the traditional classical curriculum by an elective, and the evolution of a pluralist system of formally equal, departmentalized disciplines, radically altered the conditions under which cultural artifacts, especially texts, could circulate with authority. As English professionals negotiated the boundaries of their field with neighboring disciplines, the pre-disciplinary construction of English as object of rhetoric grounded in common sense epistemology and ideals of stylistic perspicuity was recast in a form amenable to routine research, in part by an adaptation of positivist methodology to literary criticism emphasizing literary form to stabilize critical authority. By the mid-twentieth century, in the context of a now thoroughly monolinguistic criticism, this formalist emphasis enabled a methodological pluralism adaptable to other fields and subject matters, becoming one condition for emergence of U.S. Cultural Studies. I close with speculation as to how the structural contradictions and monocultural tendencies of disciplinary English may carry into Cultural Studies as well.
590 $a School code: 0883.
650 4 $a Literature, General. $3 1018152
650 4 $a Philosophy. $3 516511
650 4 $a History, United States. $3 1017393
650 4 $a Education, Language and Literature. $3 1018115
650 4 $a Education, History of. $3 599244
690 $a 0401
690 $a 0422
690 $a 0337
690 $a 0279
690 $a 0520
710 2 0 $a George Mason University. $3 1019450
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 66-11A.
790 1 0 $a Smith, Paul H., $e advisor
790 $a 0883
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2005
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3193336