維多利亞人

內(nèi)容概要

　　《牛津英國(guó)文學(xué)史—維多利亞人1830—1880(英美文學(xué)文庫(kù))》迥異于一般文學(xué)史寫作遵循年代順序的模式，以對(duì)整個(gè)社會(huì)和思想觀念產(chǎn)生深遠(yuǎn)影響的若干重大主題為線索，分析、歸納和總結(jié)了1830-1880年這一歷史時(shí)期英國(guó)文學(xué)的特點(diǎn)及成因，此外，書的卷末附有數(shù)十位維多利亞作家小傳，并介紹了其作品的可靠版本及相關(guān)的評(píng)論專著。本書史料豐富，見解獨(dú)到，不僅是頗具特色的文學(xué)史，亦可作為通論維多利亞社會(huì)歷史文化的專著，實(shí)為不可多得的上佳之作。
　　擺在讀者面前的這部《維多利亞人》，是牛津大學(xué)出版社為新世紀(jì)策劃的十三卷英國(guó)文學(xué)史系列中的第8卷，也是最早出版的分卷之一。作者大學(xué)英文教授菲利普·戴維斯。本書打破了在我國(guó)的外國(guó)文學(xué)教學(xué)研究中常見的思維定式，以社會(huì)和文化背景為主線，分析、歸納和總結(jié)了1830-1880年這一歷史時(shí)期英國(guó)文學(xué)的特點(diǎn)及成因。

書籍目錄

General Editor's Preface
List of Figures
A Note on References
Introduction
1. Rural to Urban 1830-1850
　Ⅰ. A NewWorld
?、? The Challenge to Thinking
2. Nature
?、? Darwin and the Impact of Science
?、? Cosmologies and Anthropomorphisms: Darwin,Spencer, and
Ruskin
?、? Beyond Nature and After Religion: The Future in J. S. Mill and
T. H. Huxley
3. Religion
?、? 1830-1850: Evangelicalism, the Broad Church,and
Tractarianism
　Ⅱ. The Mid-Victorian Change
4. Mind
?、?'The New Psychology': Psychology as a Branchof Science
?、?'Psychology is pre-eminently a philosophical science'
?、? Psychology, the Unconscious, and Literature
5. Conditions of Literary Production
?、? The Literary Profession, the Book Trade and Culture
　Ⅱ. The Rise of Prose
?、? New Voices
6. The Drama
7. Debatable Lands: Variety of Form and Genre in the Early
Victorian Novel
?、? Post-Aristocratic: Bulwer-Lytton, Disraeli,and Kingsley
?、? Post-Aristocratic: Thackeray versus Dickens
8. Alternative Fictions
?、? The Sensation Novel
?、? Fairy Tales and Fantasies
9. High Realism
?、? Two Novels of the 183os and their Legacy
?、? Trollope and George Eliot
10. Lives and Thoughts
?、? Life-Writing
?、? Writings about Life
11. Poetry
　Ⅰ. The Form in Difficulties
?、? Long Poems and Sequence Poems
?、? From May to September: Poetry and Belief
Conclusion
Author Bibliograpbies
Suggestions for Further Reading
Index

章節(jié)摘錄

　　In what de Tocqueville had characterized as essentially an indi-vidualistic nation， Kay and Southwood Smith thus belonged with Edwin Chadwick， in defending the need for state intervention， as from the a new brain centre of society. 'Centralization'-the creation of national laws on public health and town planning， and the use of an inspectorate to ensure their implementation-was the century's most practical version of the long-desired need for a view from outside and above. It came out of the single most coherent secular philosophy of the times-the one overall modernizing system of thought coherently flexible enough to be susceptible to applica-tion under many， varying circumstances-namely， Benthamite Utili-tarianism.　　For Bentham and for his closest follower James Mill， the Archi-medean lever by which to lift society was the impersonally rational principle of utility， cutting a path through the individualistic thickets of short-sighted sentiment and blind self-interest: the usefulness of any measure was to be calculated at the micro-level in terms of the measurable balance between the basics of pleasure and pain， at the macro-level as to whether it served the greater happiness of the great-est possible number. As progressivist professionals， new middle-class reformers opposing aristocratic dominance and administrative muddle， Kay， Smith， and Chadwick were effectively Benthamites.Yet such were the confused cross-currents of early Victorian England， that Dickens himself could hardly believe that out of the very Utilitarianism which he had satirized in Hard Times as the enemy of the poor， there came the organization of social welfare which was the poor's salvation. For perhaps the greatest seeming incongruity of all was that Edwin Chadwick， author of the First Report of the Commissioners for Inquiring into the State of Large Towns and Populous Districts of 1844， had also been the main administrator of the New Poor Law of 1834.　　Where the 1844 Report was a humane landmark in urging the necessity for statutory improvement in public health， the New Poor Law had insisted that no able-bodied man would receive assistance unless he entered a workhouse-a deliberately not to say punitively 'uninviting place of wholesome restraint' where he would be sepa-rated from his wife and children and forced to live under conditions deliberately designed to be lower （'less eligible') than the lowest wageobtainable outside. The difference between 1844 and 1834 not only seemed to be one between humane and inhumane intent， it also looked like a difference in principle between the creation of inter-vention and its removal. In the case of the New Poor Law it had been argued that the statutory payment of outdoor relief under the old welfare system， offered as an automatic right that could always be counted on， had undermined the poor's capacity for independence，by making the defence against poverty economically unnecessary.What was centralization in matters of public health but just suchartificial interference ?　　……

圖書封面

圖書標(biāo)簽Tags

無(wú)

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    維多利亞人 PDF格式下載

---