• Complain

Corey McEleney - Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility

Here you can read online Corey McEleney - Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. year: 2017, publisher: Fordham Univ Press, genre: Romance novel. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

No cover
  • Book:
    Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility
  • Author:
  • Publisher:
    Fordham Univ Press
  • Genre:
  • Year:
    2017
  • Rating:
    4 / 5
  • Favourites:
    Add to favourites
  • Your mark:
    • 80
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5

Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

Honorable Mention, 2018 MLA Prize for a First Book
Against the defensive backdrop of countless apologetic justifications for the value of literature and the humanities, Futile Pleasures reframes the current conversation by returning to the literary culture of early modern England, a culture whose defensive posture toward literature rivals and shapes our own.
During the Renaissance, poets justified the value of their work on the basis of the notion that the purpose of poetry is to please and instruct, that it must be both delightful and useful. At the same time, many of these writers faced the possibility that the pleasures of literature may be in conflict with the demand to be useful and valuable. Analyzing the rhetoric of pleasure and the pleasure of rhetoric in texts by William Shakespeare, Roger Ascham, Thomas Nashe, Edmund Spenser, and John Milton, McEleney explores the ambivalence these writers display toward literatures potential for useless, frivolous vanity.
Tracing that ambivalence forward to the modern era, this book also shows how contemporary critics have recapitulated Renaissance humanist ideals about aesthetic value. Against a longstanding tradition that defensively advocates for the redemptive utility of literature, Futile Pleasures both theorizes and performs the queer pleasures of futility. Without ever losing sight of the costs of those pleasures, McEleney argues that playing with futility may be one way of moving beyond the impasses that modern humanists, like their early modern counterparts, have always faced.

Corey McEleney: author's other books


Who wrote Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make
FUTILE PLEASURES
Futile Pleasures
EARLY MODERN LITERATURE AND THE LIMITS OF UTILITY
COREY MCELENEY
Copyright 2017 Fordham University Press All rights reserved No part of this - photo 1
Copyright 2017 Fordham University Press
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any otherexcept for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.
Fordham University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
Fordham University Press also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.
Visit us online at www.fordhampress.com.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: McEleney, Corey, author.
Title: Futile pleasures : early modern literature and the limits of utility / Corey McEleney.
Description: New York : Fordham University Press, 2017. | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2016013983 | ISBN 9780823272655 (hardback) | ISBN 9780823272662 (paper)
Subjects: LCSH: English literatureEarly modern, 15001700History and criticism. | Pleasure in literature. | Senses and sensation in literature. | Literature and societyEnglandHistory16th century. | Literature and societyEnglandHistory17th century. | BISAC: LITERARY CRITICISM / Renaissance. | SOCIAL SCIENCE / Gender Studies.
Classification: LCC PR421 .M29 2017 | DDC 820.9/003dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016013983
Printed in the United States of America
19 18 17 5 4 3 2 1
First edition
for Chris Holmes
CONTENTS
When I was young, I gave my mind
And plied myself to fruitless poetry,
Which, though it profit the professor naught,
Yet is it passing pleasing to the world.
HIERONIMO in Thomas Kyds The Spanish Tragedy
From now to the end of consciousness, wrote Susan Sontag, we are stuck with the task of defending art.previous historical moments, from which the humanities most gallant champions draw the energy that fuels their arguments.
Hence, Gregory Jusdanis, in his 2010 book Fiction Agonistes: In Defense of Literature, channels the spirit of a real knight, the Renaissance courtier and poet Sir Philip Sidney, in his rousing defense of the value of literature and the arts. Commenting that we humanists once believed that culture made us into better human beings, that we could find solutions to our problems in literature, or that art provided us with solace for the imperfections and injustices of life, Jusdanis attempts to revitalize such arguments for our current moment, which has fallen away, he claims, from these beliefs. However inadvertently, the typo here implies that the contrast Jusdanis attempts to draw cannot be entirely sustained. The aesthetic philosophy he poses in contradistinction to early humanist defenses of literature has long been critiqued by generations of historicist and materialist critics invested in establishing the (social, political, ethical) efficacy of literature. Indeed, modern humanists instead seem bound, as if by contract, to repeat the humanist ideals that Jusdanis laments we have cast aside.
Such rehearsals of humanist commonplaces are not confined to the academy; popular journalistic accounts often succumb to the same compulsion. After the New York Times columnist Frank Bruni published an op-ed piece singing the praises of the liberal arts education he received from a particularly memorable Shakespeare professor with whom he studied in college,almost exclusively to developing STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) programs, and when even academic publishers have started seeing literary studies as unmarketable and unpublishablewhen, in sum, a B.A. in English seems to be, as the opening number to the musical Avenue Q would have it, a useless degreeit is hardly surprising that Bruni would welcome and broadcast the testimony for the value of literary study handed to him by such a major political player.
As Brunis invocation of Shakespeare and Jusdaniss of Sidney suggest, current debates over the worth and significance of the humanities invite us to return to the literature of the English Renaissance, though not, I would suggest, in the straightforwardly nostalgic way that defenses such as theirs seem to encourage us to undertake. In offering the unassailable value of Renaissance literature as something of a useful solution to, or savior from, the contemporary crisis in and of the humanities, both academic and journalistic accounts overlook the degree to which that crisis is itself an extension of debates that rifted the Renaissance, in ways that prevent either the periods literature or its defenses of literature from constituting a simple panacea for the problems that currently plague us. As tempting as it is to celebrate the Renaissance as a paradise lost, a cultural moment when literature enjoyed enormous prestige before the fall into the deplorable current state of affairs, this study begins with the observation that early modern writers were no less anxious and ambivalent about the value of literature than their contemporary counterparts, however much they tried to mask that ambivalence with the commonplaces so routinely rehearsed today.
Precisely because it squares so well with our own assumptions about the meaning and virtue of our work, the Renaissance humanist idea that the pleasure of literature can be sublimated as socially and ethically useful or productivethat its potential negativity, in other words, can be dialectically recuperated or redeemed as a positive goodhas served as the primary standard by which the value of literary writing has been measured. Because the intellectual and ideological roots of the American academy, like the United States itself, can be traced back in part to the Protestant or Puritan work ethic forged in the context of early modern English culture, it is no wonder that contemporary Anglo-American critics operate according to an ends-oriented understanding of the humanities.utility as a metric for determining value. If automatically defending the utility of the literary always ends up being, ironically enough, an exercise in futility, then it may be more helpful to critique the rhetorical and institutional forces that activate such defense mechanisms, and the charges to which they respond, in the first place. In reexamining the struggles that early modern writers had with these issues, we may be in a better position to reevaluate the current (read: perpetual) crisis in the liberal arts and so to imagine alternatives to the redemptive logic that marks present as well as past justifications for the value of literature.
In sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England, as Jusdanis notes, poets such as Sidney insistently justified the profit and value of their work on the basis of the notionborrowed from antiquity, and in particular from Horacethat the purpose of poetry is to please and instruct, that it must be both delightful and useful. However, many of the same writers soon came to realize that this notion might be nothing more than wishful thinking, that the relationship between poetic pleasure and poetic utility might be far more complex, even antagonistic, than they had hoped. Concerns over what happens when the delighting and the teaching functions of poetry come into conflict with each other, or when the delighting overtakes the teaching, or when the delighting teaches us how to be bad, were expressed most explicitly by religious authorities intent on curbing what they saw as the deleterious effects of poetry and the theater. Calvinist killjoys were not, however, the only voices that articulated alarm about the potential dangers of poetic delight. Embedded, though not always explicit, in the eras literature itself are similar worries about the volatility of poetic pleasure.
Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility»

Look at similar books to Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility»

Discussion, reviews of the book Futile Pleasures: Early Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.