FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2593809312> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2593809312 endingPage "444" @default.
• W2593809312 startingPage "423" @default.
• W2593809312 abstract "Roughly a decade ago, it could be said that Charles Darwin's thought was notably absent from the discipline of literary studies. Although Darwin had long been seen as an important influence on specific writers or movements--Conrad and Hardy in England, for example, or American naturalism--this influence seemed to amount to little more than a fatalist recognition of the cruel logic of a godless cosmos. A major thinker of the nineteenth century, Darwin appeared to have almost no place in the various discourses that informed twentieth-century literary analysis, from Russian formalism and New Criticism through cultural materialism and queer theory. It is true that a few important works had been written in the 1980s that explicitly brought the insights and methods of contemporary theory to bear on Darwin and his cultural and intellectual legacies: here Gillian Beer's Darwin's Plots, Margot Norris's Beasts of the Modern Imagination, and George Levine's Darwin and the Novelists still stand out as vibrant works of scholarship. Yet while these books are cited and praised even today, they never launched entire research programs in the manner of contemporaneous works such as Stephen Greenblatt's Renaissance Self-Fashioning, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick's Between Men, or Slavoj Zizek's The Sublime Object of Ideology. This relative absence of Darwin from literary discussion was understandable, if regrettable. After all, applications of Darwin's thought to the social, the political, and the cultural have a notorious track record, having justified both eugenicists' interventions into human reproductive rights and Social Darwinists' justifications of social and economic inequalities. Humanists could be excused for expecting that renewed efforts at Darwinian cultural analysis would only reach intellectually predictable or politically repugnant conclusions. But wariness of such reductive ideas or reactionary agendas seemed to have quietly given way to outright avoidance of Darwin and even biology itself. An epistemological skepticism or methodological rigor regarding specific lines of argument had calcified into an unchallenged assumption that any gesture toward the biological would inevitably revive the kind of false universalisms that literary studies had spent much of the 1980s and 90s unmasking. At the same time, outside of literary studies, just the opposite trend seemed to be happening: Darwin was assuming an ever-greater prominence in scholarly and other public discourses. During the 1990s several disciplines beyond the hard sciences, such as philosophy, anthropology, and psychology, were taking up Darwinian theory while journalists and popularizers pumped out one best seller after another claiming to explain all manner of phenomena in terms of evolution by natural selection. In the public sphere, the most visible of these disciplines was the field of evolutionary psychology. Building on the sociobiology worked out in the 1970s by E. O. Wilson, Richard Dawkins, Robert Trivers, and others, evolutionary psychology explicitly sought, under the banner of Wilson's consilience, (1) to apply theoretical models from evolutionary biology to human behavior. And while its claims remain highly controversial, the discipline itself, as Dana Carluccio points out in her contribution to this issue, become astonishingly popular over the last twenty-five years, both as a research program and as a pop culture phenomenon (510). Carluccio observes: Its proliferating publishing venues, academic societies, and textbooks are echoed by journalism, novels, and movies that have trumpeted the field's hypotheses, making them as ubiquitous in US culture today as psychoanalytic notions, such as Freudian slips. Someone who has never heard of evolutionary psychology is nonetheless likely to believe that men find physical cues of female fertility (like youth) attractive because it helps them pass on their genes. (510-11) Of course, if evolutionary psychological reasoning has passed over into pop culture or common sense--or, maybe more precisely, into what John Guillory has called spontaneous philosophy (2) (Sokal 476)--it might be suspected that this transition has been effortless for the simple reason that the gap was so narrow to begin with. …" @default.
• W2593809312 created "2017-03-16" @default.
• W2593809312 creator A5019513911 @default.
• W2593809312 date "2009-01-01" @default.
• W2593809312 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2593809312 title "Introduction: Darwin and Literary Studies" @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1480274628 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1508522130 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1556801619 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1558678982 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1586871703 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1872053182 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1965382451 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W1998492745 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2042252191 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2048281907 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2048742481 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2051548281 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2051932678 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2054330188 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2066261007 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2070488390 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2096117508 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2133695197 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2548205588 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2789406407 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2799198479 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W2994795030 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W425059808 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W593855456 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W658444588 @default.
• W2593809312 cites W763793642 @default.
• W2593809312 doi "https://doi.org/10.1215/0041462x-2009-1001" @default.
• W2593809312 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W2593809312 type Work @default.
• W2593809312 sameAs 2593809312 @default.
• W2593809312 citedByCount "12" @default.
• W2593809312 countsByYear W25938093122016 @default.
• W2593809312 countsByYear W25938093122020 @default.
• W2593809312 countsByYear W25938093122021 @default.
• W2593809312 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2593809312 hasAuthorship W2593809312A5019513911 @default.
• W2593809312 hasBestOaLocation W25938093121 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C115903868 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C206118921 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C115903868 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C124952713 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C138885662 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C142362112 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C206118921 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C41008148 @default.
• W2593809312 hasConceptScore W2593809312C95457728 @default.
• W2593809312 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2593809312 hasLocation W25938093121 @default.
• W2593809312 hasOpenAccess W2593809312 @default.
• W2593809312 hasPrimaryLocation W25938093121 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2156309625 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2586619725 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2586704483 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2586810271 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2587479238 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2604649453 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W3169797311 @default.
• W2593809312 hasRelatedWork W4229682526 @default.
• W2593809312 hasVolume "55" @default.
• W2593809312 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2593809312 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2593809312 magId "2593809312" @default.
• W2593809312 workType "article" @default.