MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1978291358 · doi:10.1353/phl.0.0065

The Twentieth-Century Humanist Critics From Spitzer to Frye (review)

2010· article· en· W1978291358 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Anne O’Neil

Notice bibliographique

RevuePhilosophy and literature · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCanadian Identity and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHumanismRomanceHistoryLiteratureClassicsPhilosophyArtTheology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Twentieth-Century Humanist Critics From Spitzer to Frye Mary Anne O'Neil The Twentieth-Century Humanist Critics From Spitzer to Frye, by William Calin; 267 pp. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2007, $27.95. In The Twentieth-Century Humanists from Spitzer to Frye, William Calin examines the contributions of eight scholar-critics who produced their most important work between the mid-1930s and the early 1960s, before the advent of contemporary critical theory. Five are from Continental Europe. Leo Spitzer, Robert Curtius and Erich Auerbach were German-language students of Romance literatures, while Albert Béguin and Jean Rousset, both speakers of French, were leading figures of the Geneva school. Calin also includes English-language scholars: the Oxford don C. S. Lewis, the American F. O. Mathiessen, and the Canadian Northrop Frye. Calin's goal is threefold. He wants to draw distinctions between the mid-twentieth century American New Critics, who rejected extra-textual approaches in their readings, and these eight men, all of whom brought a deep knowledge of classical and biblical literature, history and, often, philosophy, to their interpretation of texts. Secondly, he argues that all eight participate in the humanist tradition that extends from the Middle Ages through the twentieth century because they believed in the continuity of a unique Western culture and celebrated the power of great books of the Western world to liberate the individual and improve society. Finally, Calin appeals to contemporary literary theorists of many stripes—post-colonialists, queer theorists, feminists—to recognize these men as their predecessors, since they too fought culture wars of their own times by pitting themselves against dominant academic discourses. Ultimately, they succeeded in expanding the literary canon and opening literary study to a non-academic, generally educated audience. Calin's book is divided into two parts, followed by extensive notes and an almost thirty-page bibliography of works on theory and general criticism as well as on the primary works of his subjects and the critical literature devoted to them. Part I consists of eight short chapters, one on each of the humanist critics. The chapters are brief, with the longest on Northrop Frye only twenty pages, and all follow a similar pattern that begins with an exposition of each scholar's contributions to the study of literature. He credits the philologist [End Page 260] Spitzer with revolutionary readings of Romance literatures from the Middle Ages to the twentieth century, Curtius for demonstrating the centrality of the Middle Ages to European culture, and Auerbach for his work on the representation of reality from Homer to Virginia Woolf as well as for his application of biblical exegesis to the study of medieval texts. Beguin was among the first to trace the origins of modernism to post-1850 France and to identify the German Romantics as the predecessors of the French moderns. Rousset radically revised our understanding of the French seventeenth-century. C. S. Lewis introduced allegory, courtly love, and the quest as the underlying structures of medieval literature. Mathiessen invented American Studies while also placing American writers in the context of world literature. Frye's most noteworthy contribution was his demonstration of the centrality of the Bible to Western literature, a belief which led him to formulate a cyclical view of literary history. Calin examines each critic's works for evidence of a methodology. He concludes that only Frye's Anatomy of Criticism (1957) is a theoretical work. What guides all eight humanist critics is a love of literature. Calin's praise of Lewis as " a sensitive, passionate, committed reader of books" (p. 91) applies equally to the other seven men he studies. In the course of each chapter, Calin points out the affinities between his subjects and most schools of literary theory that have arisen since the 1970s, including reader response, narratology, intertextuality, structuralism, archetypal and Marxist criticism, and postcolonial studies. Finally, Calin resumes the critical literature on each of these writers and evaluates it objectively. Whatever their shortcomings, all eight were solid scholars who produced innovative interpretations and treated the texts they studied with generosity and respect. All performed "critiques des beautés and not a reading for evil" (p. 147), that is...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,781
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,247
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePhilosophy and literatureMême sujetCanadian Identity and HistoryTravaux en français237 207