Weaving coherent archetypal scripts rather than ornamental appoggiaturas in an attempt at essentialization, Shakespeare did not, however, launch metanarratives which impoverish the perspective on the world. His coded mythopoetic figures do not function as transcendental agency as they do in sacred history, but rather as batteries of condensed and codified meaning or as indices of a certain culture. Intended for academic and general readers alike, this book finds in archetypes as operators or functions of discourse the explanation why Shakespeare has seemed to respond through time to as different approaches as psychological, phenomenological, deconstructionist, postcolonial, New Historicist or feminist perspectives.
By drawing some parallels between the history of ideas and literary discourses of late modernity, this book traces the influence exerted by Immanuel Kant, either directly or through the mediation of Henri Bergson’s intuitionism, Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology, Max Dessoir’s psychological aesthetics, Hans Vaihinger’s als ob fictionalism, or Karl Popper’s logical positivism. As the argument goes, background radiation of the Kantian revolution can be detected even in semiotic poetics, quantum probability, and complexity theory. An interdisciplinary approach seems appropriate when considering the works of a thinker who fused Newton’s physico-mathematics with psychology and anthropology to form a new paradigm that opened vistas to integrated disciplinary fields, such as J.F. Herbart’s psycho-physics, Wilhelm Wundt’s physiological psychology, and William James’s pragmatism. Enfolded selves, dissolution of selves into quanta of personality, and multiple hypothetical plots analogous to the Kantian thing in itself as an unfathomable matrix of possibilities are seen as latent effects of his deconstruction of rationalist metaphysics. Immanuel Kant of the Prolegomena(§ 59) emerges as the philosopher of the coastal mind, teased by the sense-world out of thought, yet not confined, but experiencing the thrill of being connected with things and possessed of the knowledge of the boundary.
Born at the intersection of literary analysis and cultural history, the present book collects evidence in support of the idea that, far from being decadent, in the sense of perverse pursuit of gratuitous refinement and aesthetic relief from historical apathy, the art at the turn of the twentieth century was energised by a desire for meaningful form, grounded in current epistemology, especially of the science maîtresse of the time, psychology, and other kindred disciplines – psychological phenomenology and phenomenological existentialism. The circle of influencers has been broadened to include figures of the latter half of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth, such as Washington Allston, H. L. Mansel, Wilhelm Wundt, Alexander Bain, Alfred Binet, Alfred Adler, and Sándor Ferenczi, whose shadows are shown to be looming behind modernist texts by T. S. Eliot, James Joyce, Virginia Woolf, Thomas Wolfe, Wallace Stevens, T. E. Hulme, Flann O’Brien, Mircea Eliade, amongst others. A less-discussed subject, literary genre in modernism, is redefined in light of psychology-based modernist aesthetics.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.