In "The Program Era", Mark McGurl offers a fundamental reinterpretation of postwar American fiction, asserting that it can be properly understood only in relation to the rise of mass higher education and the creative writing program. McGurl asks both how the patronage of the university has reorganized American literature and - even more important - how the increasing intimacy of writing and schooling can be brought to bear on a reading of this literature. McGurl argues that far from occasioning a decline in the quality or interest of American writing, the rise of the creative writing program has instead generated a complex and evolving constellation of aesthetic problems that have been explored with energy and at times brilliance by authors ranging from Flannery O'Connor to Vladimir Nabokov, Philip Roth, Raymond Carver, Joyce Carol Oates, and Toni Morrison. Through transformative readings of these and many other writers, "The Program Era" becomes a meditation on systematic creativity - an idea that until recently would have seemed a contradiction in terms, but which in our time has become central to cultural production both within and beyond the university. An engaging and stylishly written examination of an era we thought we knew, "The Program Era" will be at the center of debates about postwar literature and culture for years to come.
具体描述
读后感
评分
评分
评分
评分
用户评价
之前很期待读，看了之后发现和我的想象完全相反：它不能算sociology of literature, 而是通过文本分析的方式来阐述创意写作系统生产出的作家如何各种暗中指涉"the program." 只能说disciplinary boundaries实在害人，作者如果要critique programized writings, 为什么又要用如此self-reflexive的方式来写这样一本书呢？他对于所谓ethnic literature的定义也有些使人疑惑，难以相信竟然出自于21世纪的美国。伦敦书评有一篇elif batuman写的批评很中肯，行文比本书作者清晰流畅一百倍，看完可以不用读这本书。
评分之前很期待读，看了之后发现和我的想象完全相反：它不能算sociology of literature, 而是通过文本分析的方式来阐述创意写作系统生产出的作家如何各种暗中指涉"the program." 只能说disciplinary boundaries实在害人，作者如果要critique programized writings, 为什么又要用如此self-reflexive的方式来写这样一本书呢？他对于所谓ethnic literature的定义也有些使人疑惑，难以相信竟然出自于21世纪的美国。伦敦书评有一篇elif batuman写的批评很中肯，行文比本书作者清晰流畅一百倍，看完可以不用读这本书。
评分之前很期待读，看了之后发现和我的想象完全相反：它不能算sociology of literature, 而是通过文本分析的方式来阐述创意写作系统生产出的作家如何各种暗中指涉"the program." 只能说disciplinary boundaries实在害人，作者如果要critique programized writings, 为什么又要用如此self-reflexive的方式来写这样一本书呢？他对于所谓ethnic literature的定义也有些使人疑惑，难以相信竟然出自于21世纪的美国。伦敦书评有一篇elif batuman写的批评很中肯，行文比本书作者清晰流畅一百倍，看完可以不用读这本书。
评分之前很期待读，看了之后发现和我的想象完全相反：它不能算sociology of literature, 而是通过文本分析的方式来阐述创意写作系统生产出的作家如何各种暗中指涉"the program." 只能说disciplinary boundaries实在害人，作者如果要critique programized writings, 为什么又要用如此self-reflexive的方式来写这样一本书呢？他对于所谓ethnic literature的定义也有些使人疑惑，难以相信竟然出自于21世纪的美国。伦敦书评有一篇elif batuman写的批评很中肯，行文比本书作者清晰流畅一百倍，看完可以不用读这本书。
评分之前很期待读，看了之后发现和我的想象完全相反：它不能算sociology of literature, 而是通过文本分析的方式来阐述创意写作系统生产出的作家如何各种暗中指涉"the program." 只能说disciplinary boundaries实在害人，作者如果要critique programized writings, 为什么又要用如此self-reflexive的方式来写这样一本书呢？他对于所谓ethnic literature的定义也有些使人疑惑，难以相信竟然出自于21世纪的美国。伦敦书评有一篇elif batuman写的批评很中肯，行文比本书作者清晰流畅一百倍，看完可以不用读这本书。
相关图书
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息，本站不存储任何数据与内容，任何内容与数据均与本站无关，如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有