FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W11600872> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W11600872 endingPage "100" @default.
• W11600872 startingPage "73" @default.
• W11600872 abstract "Why shit now? Or, to put my question somewhat less ambiguously (and somewhat less scandalously): why this recent upsurge of interest in excrement and visions thereof? Perhaps the interest has to do with Sigmund in that doctor's exemplary clinical attention to the body and its products. When participating in the French-led return to Freud, we may find ourselves necessarily turning back to shit, inspecting this low matter with high seriousness. Another contributing factor may be the rise of cultural studies. One way of distinguishing between cultures to consider their differing attitudes towards excrement. Is shit, to a given culture, a good thing? An evil thing? A sacred--both good and evil--thing? Also there are those theorists who concern themselves with categories of value in the post-industrial, post-modern era. Jean Baudrillard, for example, in commenting upon the consumer society, describes how everything in that society is finally digested and reduced to the same homogeneous fecal matter....a controlled, lubricated, and consumed excretion (fecalite) henceforth transferred into things, everywhere diffused in the indistinguishability of things and of social relations (34-35). What are we to make of a world where the coprophiliac Ren and Stimpy--indeed, the coprolaliac Beavis and Butt-head--have become our children's role models? Are we experiencing a shift toward all-pervasive Excrementality? Is this the advent of an age where shit will be golden (here I pun on the Renaissance term goldfinder: a seeker-out of excrement)? Are we seeing a future in which Sterculius, Roman god of dung, will rise from the ruined cloaca and reign supreme? It is, of course, extremely difficult to say. What we can say with some certainty, however, that nowadays excrement appears to be functioning as a sort of cohesive between various disciplinary discourses. It behooves one, therefore--lest one be counted among the theoretically unhip--to know one's shit. The excremental a now-familiar phrase in literary-critical circles, first appeared as a chapter title in John Middleton Murry's 1954 biography of Jonathan Swift. In that chapter Murry echoes a number of previous analysts (Dr. Johnson, Sir Walter Scott, D. H. Lawrence) in diagnosing Swift as suffering from a cloacal obsession--the best evidence for this diagnosis being Swift's scatological poems of the early 1730s, the thematic thrust of which can be summed up in the closing refrain of one of these, Cassinus and Peter: Nor wonder how I lost my Wits;/Oh! Caelia, Caelia, Caelia shits (2: 597). Cassinus's lament Murry interprets as Swift's lament, and he goes on to deplore Swift's attitude as so perverse, unnatural, mentally diseased, humanly wrong (440). In response to Murry's psychopathological reading, Norman O. Brown, in his 1959 psychoanalytic inquiry Life Against Death, argues that in his scatological verse Swift subtly solicits the processes of repression and sublimation in our culture. The thesis of this chapter, Brown writes, is that if we are willing to listen to Swift we will find startling anticipations of Freudian theorems about anality, about sublimation, and about the universal neurosis of mankind (186). In reflecting upon Murry's and Brown's different readings of Swift's scatology, one comes to the realization that there not one excremental vision, but rather multiple excremental visions--perhaps as many as there are visionaries. In the essay that follows I wish to consider still other excrementalists and their visions. I will begin with an analysis of the attempts by an early ethnologist (John G. Bourke) and psychologist (Sigmund Freud) to inaugurate a scientific discourse of shit, then turn to a brief consideration of the new emeticism recently articulated by Ashraf H. A. Rushdy. After this I will compare Mikhail Bakhtin's vision of excrement to that of Julia Kristeva (cum Mary Douglas), then finally employ Kristeva's interpretive paradigm of abjection in an analysis of the excrementality of James Joyce. …" @default.
• W11600872 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W11600872 creator A5002371716 @default.
• W11600872 date "1994-03-01" @default.
• W11600872 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W11600872 title "Powers of Ordure: James Joyce and the Excremental Vision(s)" @default.
• W11600872 cites W138286852 @default.
• W11600872 cites W1491683378 @default.
• W11600872 cites W2051268679 @default.
• W11600872 cites W2270192830 @default.
• W11600872 cites W2339439220 @default.
• W11600872 hasPublicationYear "1994" @default.
• W11600872 type Work @default.
• W11600872 sameAs 11600872 @default.
• W11600872 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W11600872 countsByYear W116008722014 @default.
• W11600872 countsByYear W116008722017 @default.
• W11600872 countsByYear W116008722019 @default.
• W11600872 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W11600872 hasAuthorship W11600872A5002371716 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C119857082 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C133979268 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C2776650110 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C2780249654 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W11600872 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C107038049 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C111472728 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C119857082 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C124952713 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C133979268 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C138885662 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C142362112 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C27206212 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C2776291640 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C2776650110 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C2780249654 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C41008148 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C52119013 @default.
• W11600872 hasConceptScore W11600872C95457728 @default.
• W11600872 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W11600872 hasLocation W116008721 @default.
• W11600872 hasOpenAccess W11600872 @default.
• W11600872 hasPrimaryLocation W116008721 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W10792346 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W142165033 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W1516334526 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W1606811205 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W1630337163 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W1967112798 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W1986990680 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2040420774 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2041398317 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2328190112 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2602567714 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2620752230 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W289699140 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2965855914 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W326502014 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W54122244 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W600353402 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W70608569 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W71248217 @default.
• W11600872 hasRelatedWork W2596823424 @default.
• W11600872 hasVolume "27" @default.
• W11600872 isParatext "false" @default.
• W11600872 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W11600872 magId "11600872" @default.
• W11600872 workType "article" @default.