Suchergebnisse

Congrès "L'horizon" de la SAES, Lille, Université Charles-de-Gaulle Lille 3, mai 2010 ; International audience

International audience ; Congrès "L'horizon" de la SAES, Lille, Université Charles-de-Gaulle Lille 3, mai 2010

Congrès "L'horizon" de la SAES, Lille, Université Charles-de-Gaulle Lille 3, mai 2010 ; International audience

International audience ; Eighteenth-century pseudo-oriental fictions were determined by a process of literary recycling involving the salvaging, subversion and recreation of oriental and pseudo-oriental material. This article focuses on the English playwright Edward Young who devised his play Busiris in 1719 by recycling the pseudo-oriental heroic drama template, by disguising propagandist discourse in fictional garb, and by salvaging ancient and modern orientalist scholarship. Though overlooked by contemporary critics, this last element of the recycling process is, I argue, fundamental to understanding the creation and reception of pseudo-oriental texts during the Enlightenment, when knowledge was disseminated across fictions and reinvented by fiction. Accordingly, the first part of this article surveys the different elements belonging to the composition of the play. It then deals with the transformation of the three intersecting elements constituting it, namely orientalist scholarship, heroic drama and Hanoverian politics. This leads to showing how the drama was caught in a cycle of novelty, one where it was revisited and reinvented by literary critics and second-hand historians.

International audience ; Eighteenth-century pseudo-oriental fictions were determined by a process of literary recycling involving the salvaging, subversion and recreation of oriental and pseudo-oriental material. This article focuses on the English playwright Edward Young who devised his play Busiris in 1719 by recycling the pseudo-oriental heroic drama template, by disguising propagandist discourse in fictional garb, and by salvaging ancient and modern orientalist scholarship. Though overlooked by contemporary critics, this last element of the recycling process is, I argue, fundamental to understanding the creation and reception of pseudo-oriental texts during the Enlightenment, when knowledge was disseminated across fictions and reinvented by fiction. Accordingly, the first part of this article surveys the different elements belonging to the composition of the play. It then deals with the transformation of the three intersecting elements constituting it, namely orientalist scholarship, heroic drama and Hanoverian politics. This leads to showing how the drama was caught in a cycle of novelty, one where it was revisited and reinvented by literary critics and second-hand historians.

1. Introduction -- I. Resonant Identities: Models, Circulations, Correspondences -- 2. "Not fit for any other pursuit": Shifting Places, Shifting Identities in Ludovico di Varthema's Itinerario -- 3. "A Pattern to all Princes": Locating the Queen of Sheba -- 4. "Endued with a natural disposition to resonance and sympathy": "Harmonious" Jones's Intimate Reading and Cultural Translation of India -- II. Textual Resonances: Receptions, Translations, Transformations -- 5. Ancient Persia, Early Modern England, and the Labours of "Reception" -- 6. "Enthusiastick" Uses of an Oriental Tale: The English Translations of Ibn Tufayl's Hayy Ibn Yaqdhan in the Eighteenth Century -- 7. The Manchu Invasion of Britain: Nomadic Resonances in Eighteenth-Century Fiction, Chinoiserie Aesthetics, and Material Culture -- III. Aesthetic Resonances: Material Culture and Artistic Sensibilities -- 8. From Jehol to Stowe: Ornamental Orientalism and the Aesthetics of the Anglo-Chinese Garden -- 9. "A Mart for Everything": Commercial Empire and India as Bazaar in the Long Eighteenth Century -- 10. Collecting in India and Transferring to Britain, or the Intertwined Lives of Indian Statues and Colonial Administrators (Late Eighteenth Century to Early Nineteenth Century)

International audience ; To speak about orientalism now is to explain the persistent concern, among academic and non-academic readers and writers alike, with the transformative effect of Edward Said's Orientalism (1978). Said's text has been taken as a challenge by historians of society and of literature alike. To these scholars, the book offered a vast new field of inquiry into the relationship between European and colonial history, between cultural production and capitalism, and between Enlightenment idealism and the politics of domination. Orientalism was also a particular model of interpretive methodology, which repurposed Orientalism, once a term for cultural appreciation and interest, to name a relationship of mistrust, abuse, and control. We show in this essay that Said's argument about the inextricable ties between Europe and its colonial domains has been so deeply absorbed as an intellectual, ethical, and political imperative that no serious scholarship is now imaginable that remains unaware of imperialism as a formative element of European history and culture. As a model of interpretive methodology, Said's work has been subjected to some of the most poignant and compelling criticisms, especially by contemporary British historiography and literary criticism working on the eighteenth-century period and whose purpose and effect have been to expand and improve the examination and understanding of imperialism and the enduring practices and implications of imperial culture. What has perplexed eighteenth-century scholars and then encouraged them to take up the question of Orientalism was the fact that Said largely omitted periods prior to Bonaparte's expedition in Egypt in 1798 and provided a monolithic and hegemonic version of Orientalism as discursive formation, transportable and translatable to any given time and place. Scholars of the eighteenth-century period, and more particularly, given the scope of Said's research, those working in the fields of the history of empire and in literary criticism, have ...

International audience ; To speak about orientalism now is to explain the persistent concern, among academic and non-academic readers and writers alike, with the transformative effect of Edward Said's Orientalism (1978). Said's text has been taken as a challenge by historians of society and of literature alike. To these scholars, the book offered a vast new field of inquiry into the relationship between European and colonial history, between cultural production and capitalism, and between Enlightenment idealism and the politics of domination. Orientalism was also a particular model of interpretive methodology, which repurposed Orientalism, once a term for cultural appreciation and interest, to name a relationship of mistrust, abuse, and control. We show in this essay that Said's argument about the inextricable ties between Europe and its colonial domains has been so deeply absorbed as an intellectual, ethical, and political imperative that no serious scholarship is now imaginable that remains unaware of imperialism as a formative element of European history and culture. As a model of interpretive methodology, Said's work has been subjected to some of the most poignant and compelling criticisms, especially by contemporary British historiography and literary criticism working on the eighteenth-century period and whose purpose and effect have been to expand and improve the examination and understanding of imperialism and the enduring practices and implications of imperial culture. What has perplexed eighteenth-century scholars and then encouraged them to take up the question of Orientalism was the fact that Said largely omitted periods prior to Bonaparte's expedition in Egypt in 1798 and provided a monolithic and hegemonic version of Orientalism as discursive formation, transportable and translatable to any given time and place. Scholars of the eighteenth-century period, and more particularly, given the scope of Said's research, those working in the fields of the history of empire and in literary criticism, have been keen to respond to the Orientalist challenge. This allowed them not only to embrace the Saidian perspective and revisit the corpus of eighteenth-century literature through the Orientalist prism but also, at a second stage perhaps, to refine and adapt the concept of Orientalism to time and place specifics and display a more anxious history of empire. The re-reading of European textual materials with an eye to Orientalism has been (and continues to be) enabling of historicist understandings of literary representation and its potentially collusive relationship with the histories of colonialism. Developments in colonial historiography and related fields such as historical anthropology have made possible new insights into the relationship between eighteenth-century English literature and empire. Orientalism also provided an analytical frame to think about matters related to the construction of tropes, the transformation of Eastern texts as they traveled across countries and continents, the promotion and demotion of genres, the question of canon formation, the birth of the " English " novel, gender, and the impact of other forces than empire, such as the book market, in determining Orientalist fashions. To speak about orientalism now is to explain the persistent concern, among academic and non-academic readers and writers, with the transformative effect of Edward Said's Orientalism. The text has become a challenge for historians of society and historians of literature alike because