MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1982050037 · doi:10.1353/utq.2006.0130

Conrad and Empire (review)

2006· article· en· W1982050037 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Neil ten Kortenaar

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueJoseph Conrad and Literature
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEmpireCapitalismColonialismDreamHistoryTheme (computing)PhilosophyReading (process)Power (physics)LiteratureArt historyClassicsArtLawPoliticsAncient history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Conrad and Empire Neil Ten Kortenaar (bio) Stephen Ross . Conrad and EmpireUniversity of Missouri Press. 208. US $39.95 The Empire in the title of Stephen Ross's study of Conrad should properly be in quotation marks. It refers not to colonialism or even to neocolonialism but to Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's book Empire and to their idiosyncratic use of the word to refer to globalizing capitalism. Ross's is thus not a study of a particular theme in Conrad but rather an application of a particular critical theory to Conrad, as though a monograph calling itself Conrad and History followed Francis Fukuyama in assuming there was an end to history and showed how Conrad had already foreseen that end. Ross's publisher colludes in the misrepresentation by featuring on the cover a map of Africa, the continent most associated with Conrad but the least integrated into the skeins of global capitalism. There is good news, however: what Ross's study does best - a close reading of Conrad's four greatest novels - it does very well. Ross actually applies three distinct heuristics to Conrad, which in his desire for totalization he assumes are all related. The first is Hardt and Negri's dream-vision of the modern world, which has almost no reference to particulars on the ground and, at the same time, almost no analytical power. This is not Foucault or Jameson, not even close. Fortunately, Ross makes little actual use of this world model and uses the term 'Empire ' merely as a shorthand to mean capitalist modernity, including secularism, instrumental reason, and science. Capitalist modernity (Empire) is distinguished from imperialism as usually understood by its indifference to the nation. In Heart of Darkness, for instance, Ross focuses on the anonymous 'Company,' which he takes as a metonym for global forces, rather [End Page 319] than on the equally anonymous imperial nation. He then foregrounds the devastating operations of the law (and not, as in a more common reading, the absence of the law). The second heuristic Ross makes use of is Lacan. This, of course, is theory as powerful as any. Nevertheless it, too, has drawbacks, foremost among them its ahistorical nature. Again, Ross succeeds in redeeming what I would have thought to be an unpromising strategy because he does not use Conrad to prove Lacan but uses Lacanian vocabulary to describe what Conrad is doing. Ross reads Lacan as having more to say about the psyche under capitalism than about human psychology in general. The 'Law' that Ross believes the Company is bringing to Africa is the Lacanian Name of the Father that also prevents Kurtz's union with the Intended. The third heuristic, to my mind the least promising of all, is Nietzsche's notions of slave morality and master morality. A tendentious binary where slave morality (which includes all suspension of desire, including religion and love) is always false and harmful, and master morality (identified as existential authenticity) is desirable but unattainable does lead to some critical misreadings and strange omissions, but I was pleased to find how much valuable insight Ross could nonetheless derive from these notions. Ross's application of the same heuristic to four texts clarifies, for instance, how much Kurtz, Jim, and Nostromo have in common. The closing of horizons performed by the application of these limited heuristics suggests a cynicism in Ross, but, if so, it proves a worthy complement to Conrad's own cynicism. Ross believes that the ease with which he can apply his theoretical models to Conrad shows the novelist's prescience: he says Conrad was a 'proto-Lacanian' of 'uncanny accuracy.' One could make the opposite argument: that Conrad already contains the later theorists who would be used to interpret him because his theme is precisely the desire to see around the world and so escape one's place in it. Ross gives altogether too much credence to Vladimir and the Professor in The Secret Agent, characters who see the arbitrary and constructed nature of world but are deceived into thinking that their insight means they are superior to that world. Conrad's ironic conservatism allows him to return any critical...

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,041
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,138

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,008
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,003
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0410,017

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,176
Écart entre enseignants0,169 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

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
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlyMême sujetJoseph Conrad and LiteratureTravaux en français237 207