http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Mirabile, Michael James (검색결과 2 건)
-
Mirabile, Michael James Yale University 2002 해외박사(DDOD)
In this study I pursue the range of theoretical questions relevant to metafiction within the context of the modern novel. “Metafiction” has become synonymous with “postmodern metafiction.” But the well-known self-consciousness of modern novels cannot be easily equated with the themes of postmodern literature. I consequently devote this study to a consideration of the unique features of modern metafiction. Throughout my close readings of specific novels, I keep in the forefront of my discussion the impact that novelistic self-reflexivity has on the reception and appreciation of fiction. What happens to the procedures of textual analysis, I repeatedly ask, when a novel reads its own contents? In the Introduction I uphold the distinction between the ambiguity of high modern metafiction and the more intractable “unreadability” of postmodern metafiction to suggest that the modern novelists' deep investment in interpretive strategies is incompatible with the current theoretical valorization of “uninterpretable” or “irretrievable” texts, as well as with the general opposition to the critical enterprise. Critics have noted how the inscription of reading in the modern novel tends to subvert various approaches to reading, as in the hostility toward models of depth analysis shared by Henry James, Ford Madox Ford, and Wyndham Lewis. The tendency toward foreclosure does not extend far enough, however, to include a refusal of hermeneutics and meaning. Several defining aspects of high modern metafiction emerge in James's late novels. Starting from the devaluation of different versions of extrinsic criticism, James establishes a fundamental typology of reading strategies in his writings on the novel and in his fiction. My examination of <italic> In the Cage</italic> (1898) and <italic>The Sacred Fount</italic> (1901) is guided by the tension in late James between a desire to write self-explicating fictions and a commitment to the models of critical reading embodied by his centers of consciousness. Both Ford Madox Ford and Wyndham Lewis adopt the methods of the Jamesian inscription of reading in order to preserve the modernist overdetermination of meaning against the claims of symptomatic reading. Ford privileges an Impressionistic hermeneutic; and Lewis, by direct contrast, privileges an Expressionistic or “externalist” hermeneutic. While Ford's <italic>The Good Soldier </italic> (1915) challenges the procedures of psychological reading, Lewis's <italic> The Revenge for Love</italic> (1937) offers a polemically charged parody of the Marxist critique of art. In entirely distinct ways, these novels stage scenes of reading with the aim of diminishing the force of critical practices that are preoccupied with excavating a concealed subtext. Ford and Lewis seem to direct the internal commentaries of their fictions at interpretive reductionism and, by extension, at the growing influence of explanatory discourses that have their origins in Continental radicalism. Finally, Michel Butor and Alain Robbe-Grillet attempt to dissociate the inscription of reading from exemplarity. By including multiple scenes of <italic> re</italic>reading in their novels instead of a singular scene of reading, they explore the possibility of a non-allegorical inscription of reading. As the boundaries separating the embedded fiction from the framing narrative appear less definitive, it becomes increasingly difficult for the reader of the <italic>nouveau roman</italic> to understand inscriptions of reading as representations of—or as metaphors or allegories for—the larger fiction.
-
Mirabile, Robert Raymond Princeton University 2004 해외박사(DDOD)
Prior research on social identity and persuasion has emphasized the tendency for people to be more persuaded by sources with whom they share a social identity (ingroup sources) than sources with whom they do not share a social identity (outgroup sources). The current research, however, identified conditions in which the opposite proved true. Across four studies it was found that participants were more persuaded when they received a nonprototypical message (i.e. one not typically associated with the source's social group) from an enemy outgroup source (i.e. a member of a group perceived to hold an oppositional viewpoint to that of one's ingroup) than when they received the same message from an ingroup source. This persuasion effect was not driven or moderated by consistency of the message with recipients' initial attitudes. Instead, participants were more persuaded by enemy outgroup sources in such cases because of decreased perceptions of source and message bias. Moreover, the persuasion difference was only found among message recipients who considered themselves ingroup members, further highlighting the role of social identity in these findings.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
