MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024871808 · doi:10.1353/cli.2012.0006

The Laicization of American Literary Studies

2012· article· en· W2024871808 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donald E. Pease

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Literature · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostmodernismAmerican literatureRomanceSecularismLiteraturePoetryVictorian literatureConvictionReligious studiesPhilosophyHistoryLawArtIslamTheologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Laicization of American Literary Studies Donald E. Pease (bio) Amy Hungerford, Postmodern Belief: American Literature and Religion since 1960. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010. 224 pp. $65.00; $27.95 paper. Our literature is a substitute for religion, and so is our religion. T. S. Eliot, “A Dialogue on Dramatic Poetry” Upon reading Amy Hungerford’s Postmodern Belief: American Literature and Religion since 1960, I felt as if I were entering the twenty-first century by way of a residual form of literary modernism. In the latter half of the twentieth century, critical secularism, poststructural theory, and identity politics combined to discredit any meaningful relationship between religious belief and American literature. Hungerford’s provocative monograph marks the return of the question of religious belief to American literary studies. Rather than confirming the secular conviction that religion and literature occupy separate, mutually exclusive realms, Hungerford describes literature as the embodiment of “the imaginative work required to maintain the viability of belief in the secular age” (122). In so doing, she reaffirms the once dominant but now marginalized assumption that literature should be construed as a transposition of religious belief. Religion and literature have existed in a condition of mutual dependence for centuries. M. H. Abrams described Romantic poetry as a practice of “natural supernaturalism.” Matthew [End Page 174] Arnold believed that Victorian literature had taken religion’s place as the cultural agency empowered to order the human world. In the United States, as Hungerford notes, this notion was rendered monumental in T. S. Eliot’s and Wallace Stevens’s modernism and propagated through new critical pedagogies to Americans going to college on the G.I. bill (131). In the 1950s and 1960s, Eliot’s poetry endowed literature with a quasi-scriptural authority; Northrop Frye’s archetypal criticism characterized the teaching and interpretation of literature as a quasi-religious calling. After the 1960s, critical secularists relegated the religious imagination to the margins. But Hungerford writes as if the substitution of literature for religion that took place in the nineteenth century has recurred at the outset of the twenty-first century and turned the premodern past into the postmodern future in which she wants her readers to believe. In restoring literature’s religious authorization, Hungerford also aspires to make skeptical literary critics cognizant of their disavowed affiliations with the commitments of true believers. Before taking up the mantle of the literary critic, Northrop Frye traveled Saskatchewan backroads as an ordained minister in search of converts to the United Church of Canada. The Yale New Critics William K. Wimsatt and Cleanth Brooks correlated their literary theory with the religious dogma of the Incarnation. In the acknowledgments to Postmodern Belief, Hungerford reveals similar evangelical influences on her literary vocation. Her mother, Valerie, was the “English daughter of an Anglican priest and, in America, lifelong seeker after God” (ix). Joel, her father, was attracted to the “spiritual power” of various New Age practices, including the Wicca religion (ix). In her adolescence, Hungerford accompanied fellow Christian Pentecostals of The Church of Our Savior in “Youth Encounters” in her lifelong quest to “understand the reasons behind the exercise of that power” (ix). Hungerford’s effort to carve out a religious space different from that of her parents led to her discovery that Ralph Waldo Emerson and The Book of Common Prayer were “the earliest teachers” (ix) of a literary calling that inspired her to articulate what she “thought was religious about the literature” she loved (x). [End Page 175] Hungerford thanks her husband for the courage to act upon this motivation by teaching her the meaning of Roman Catholicism and proving that “with imagination and a good set of beads, one can remain faithful, come war or higher degrees” (x). Hungerford’s citation of the Wicca religion as an influence on her literary calling comparable to Emerson’s essays indicates what distinguishes her understanding of postmodern belief from that of her contemporaries. Hungerford has not written this monograph to add religion to race, gender, sexual orientation, class, and disability as a crucial arbiter of identity. Belief matters more than identity to her way of being in the world. It is because Hungerford considers her belief in...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary LiteratureSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207