MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2991762897 · doi:10.1353/esc.2017.0047

Masculinism as Global Psychosis: A Cognitive-Enactivist Reading of Martin Amis's "Men"

2017· article· en· W2991762897 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cristina Ionica

Notice bibliographique

RevueEnglish studies in Canada · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueNarrative Theory and Analysis
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNarrativeSociologyHeteroglossiaPsychologyPsychoanalysisLiteratureAestheticsPhilosophyArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Masculinism as Global Psychosis:A Cognitive-Enactivist Reading of Martin Amis's "Men" Cristina Ionica (bio) David herman defines style as a "jointly formal and social phenomenon" that prompts reflection on discourse as "an instrument that can either work against or reinforce patterns of conflict—more or less unquestioned hierarchies and antagonisms—operative in society at large" (Story Logic 207). Martin Amis appears to concur, claiming that style always carries ethical implications (Experience 121). Amis's novels enact stories' participation in universal masculinist circuits of power in ways that denounce masculinist societal frameworks' malignity, as his nonempathic-to-sadistic protagonist-narrators are allowed to spin outrageous guilt-deflecting fables to the point of self-incrimination. Moreover, his peculiar modes of questioning textual authority enact the narrative nature of cognitive processes and the illusively benign ways in which essentialist subsumptions of otherness breed violence, dehumanization, and pain in interpersonal and global contexts. Adding to recent cognitive-enactivist readings of narrative fiction, this discussion of key rhetorical and narrative aspects of Amis's fiction evinces his commitment to subject masculinism and its various subdivisions (misogyny, heteronormativity, and racism) to haunting scrutiny in order to foreground the toxicity at their core and galvanize powerful reader responses. [End Page 67] Diedrick, Finney, Miller, Dern, Bentley, and others acknowledge Amis's criticism of atavistic forms of masculinity. Their close readings emphasize his consistent toying with traditional distinctions between textual instances (author, narrator, protagonist), stressing that his sophisticated use of narrative unreliability generates peculiar forms of reader engagement (it consistently places interpretive responsibilities of ethical import on readers). My enactivist reading allows for a more comprehensive demonstration of the scope and potential effects of Amis's critique, as it foregrounds and explicates Amis's condemnation of the deleterious social effects of several masculinist practices read by other critics as benign and potentially apt to attract readers' sympathy (such as self-abuse and false victimization). It also proposes Amis's peculiar and obsessive use of masculinist narrators as the expression of an insight concerning masculinist functioning particularly relevant in today's context of ascension of extreme right movements and increasing impact of "fake news" worldwide. Herman sees modernist writers' stronger focus on characters' perceptions of events not as a shift from external to inner reality but as a conceptualization of a new "geography of mind" that rejects "Cartesian mappings of the mental as a bracketed-off interior space," imagining the mind as a "distributional flow interwoven with rather than separated from situations, events, and processes in the world" ("Re-minding" 255). He relates this model to Francisco Varela, Evan Thompson, and Eleanor Rosch's "enactivist approach" to cognition (cognition as enactment or embodied action rather than a matter of representations/projections), noting that "modernists put characters' mental states and dispositions into circulation with the possibilities for action and interaction that, from a postcognitivist perspective, help constitute the mind in the first place" (258). Herman's argument can be extended to Amis's employment of masculinist narrators, whose manipulative, self-serving accounts function as "action loops" that "criss-cross the organism and its environment" (Clark 35, quoted in Herman, "Re-minding" 260). In narrating, John Self (Money), John Prince (Other People), Sam Young (London Fields), the unnamed narrators of Time's Arrow and House of Meetings, and most of Amis's other narrators relentlessly assess opportunities for self-serving action, toiling to generate socially sanctioned contexts for their acts and safeguard their clearly discernible, though vehemently disavowed, sadistic pleasures against a backdrop of increasingly adverse public reactions to exploitation and abuse and increasingly empowering legal protections for potential victims. However, narrative unreliability markers consistently compromise their pursuits, prompting attentive readers to acknowledge their deceit and malignity. [End Page 68] Amis thus uses an enactivist framework to expose masculinist attitudes, discourses, and actions as elements of sensorimotor assemblages exclusively fixated on exploitation and self-perpetuation, whose destructiveness can be eradicated only by expunging all their subroutines from our "value landscape" (Caracciolo 367) and socio-cultural environment. Amis's novels engage readers in complex evaluative actions, prompting their enactment of procedures of diagnosis and rejection at any contact with self-serving and unreliable discourses. They also provide readers with...

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)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,572
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,657

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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 Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,314
Écart entre enseignants0,272 · 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.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
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
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEnglish studies in CanadaMême sujetNarrative Theory and AnalysisTravaux en français237 207