Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2010656819> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W2010656819 endingPage "79" @default.
- W2010656819 startingPage "57" @default.
- W2010656819 abstract "The Late-Victorian Romance Revival:A Generic Excursus Anna Vaninskaya Attempting to define romance is like attempting to define genre itself: an immensely revelatory but ultimately futile exercise.1 At the very least it is doomed to circularity and tautology, for it starts out already knowing what the definition is—enough, at least, to specify or to extend it. Taxonomies build on and link up with previously existing taxonomies, along a chain that disappears into the remote past of Western literary history. To abstract a set of romance characteristics from a group of texts one has to use some criteria to identify that group in the first place, and any such criteria will be a version of the very romance characteristics one is looking for. But though they may be methodologically problematic, there is no shortage of ideal formal definitions which attempt to conscript everything from medieval tales of aristocratic love and supernatural adventure to modern-day genre fiction, and Northrop Frye's mythos of summer is only the most famous. These models can hardly do justice to the complex cultural background of an individual work, let alone a period phenomenon like the romance revival of the 1880s and 90s. Derek Brewer's canonical characterisation will serve to illustrate the difficulty. Like Northrop Frye and Gillian Beer,2 Brewer is interested in romance as a mode in continuous metamorphosis from Greek antiquity, through the medieval and early modern cycles, to Morris, MacDonald, Wells, and finally Tolkien. The romance is a fantasy story about an individual's personal love and adventure, in which quest and conflict culminate in a happy ending. The story is told in a natural sequence with rhetorical art, local realism, and humour. The subject-matter is secular, but there are symbolic implications. Romance may be said to be the antithesis of tragedy.… It is a late-cultural form, sophisticated and aesthetically self-aware, told by well-educated men to upper-class audiences.3 But it also shares many of the formal characteristics of folktale narratives and makes extensive use of convention and repetition, [End Page 57] of the marvellous, supernatural, and improbable. Unlike the epic, the romance is concerned with the individual, though public and private are usually reconciled in the happy ending and social responsibility is restored. Although Brewer's representative sample is mainly medieval, his definition is meant to be general enough to apply to a variety of contexts: Romance is a mode … and examples are found from Classical Antiquity to the present day.4 Indeed, in the critical debates of the fin de siècle many of its elements—idealism, optimism, improbability, adventure—were commonplace. But just as many were conspicuous by their absence, or were altered beyond recognition. The target audience was assumed to be significantly lower on the social scale; the relative prominence of individual or society was fiercely contested; fantasy and humour were by no means always welcome guests. The romance itself appeared younger: the earliest (and most juvenile) of literary modes. For its detractors it was, if anything, the very opposite of its aristocratic predecessor, a mass commercial genre produced by hacks for the edification of lower-class boys. Those more charitably disposed talked of Scott and Stevenson and the literature of the youth of mankind. None of this undermines Brewer's definition in its entirety, for there is no doubt that it holds well for certain times, places, and individual texts. But neither it nor any other summation can be expected to distil the essence of more than a thousand years of literary development. A genre is not an abstract entity, but one which manifests itself in concrete works and at specific historical moments: it is, in the end, what contemporaries (and future generations) make of it, and what they make of it alters over time. When one recalls that even during a given period different interpretative communities approach the same object with very different agendas, the possibility of a unifying definition dissipates like the mirage it is. So what made the late-Victorian romance revival a new and period-specific departure? After all, romance had been defining itself against realism ever since the rise of the novel, and..." @default.
- W2010656819 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2010656819 creator A5057612786 @default.
- W2010656819 date "2008-01-01" @default.
- W2010656819 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
- W2010656819 title "The Late-Victorian Romance Revival: A Generic Excursus" @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1480651196 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1481485974 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1485687031 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1490450745 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1506561022 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1515090986 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1518175080 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1521184614 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1531347886 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1546514714 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1553119385 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1553728082 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1557213506 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1564473141 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1569555063 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1574174711 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1574534118 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1574840143 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1579757245 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1583361473 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1586590649 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1587647606 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1589292268 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1592633793 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1594671269 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1596425611 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1606089356 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1624892071 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1886300406 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1963828592 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1970566719 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1980678965 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1989646042 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W1995945562 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2005312755 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2005898912 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2011172094 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2017752582 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2035262813 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2044091138 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2046102091 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2048915660 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2051785367 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W205351121 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2066228799 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2073333147 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2080728532 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2091006383 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2094543001 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2226127147 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W230463705 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2320175026 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2461857790 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2765045801 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2798104812 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W2799129596 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W3147353766 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W560159243 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W561540700 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W566669620 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W597881068 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W613241825 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W632932678 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W643892289 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W649790361 @default.
- W2010656819 cites W656586806 @default.
- W2010656819 doi "https://doi.org/10.2487/elt.51.1(2008)0015" @default.
- W2010656819 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
- W2010656819 type Work @default.
- W2010656819 sameAs 2010656819 @default.
- W2010656819 citedByCount "20" @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192012 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192013 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192014 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192015 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192016 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192017 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192018 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192019 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192020 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192021 @default.
- W2010656819 countsByYear W20106568192023 @default.
- W2010656819 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2010656819 hasAuthorship W2010656819A5057612786 @default.
- W2010656819 hasBestOaLocation W20106568192 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C42133412 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C518914266 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
- W2010656819 hasConcept C534859617 @default.