Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-skzmx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T12:22:36.650Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Rita Felski
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

I want to thank Wai Chee Dimock for initiating this forum and my agile interlocutors for responding to my work. In the final chapter of The Limits of Critique, I talk about reading as an act of cocreation and composition—a practice of thinking and feeling with, rather than against, a text. Such a vision of what it means to read is amply confirmed in these generous and generative essays.

Sarah Beckwith is almost preternaturally attuned to what I am trying to do in The Limits of Critique, to the extent of conveying my ideas better than I do myself. She glosses postcritical, for example, as meaning that “we come after critique and through it rather than that we have dispensed with it, though that meaning will surely be ascribed to her.” Nailed on both counts. I appreciate her attentiveness to how I write: to mood and disposition as being fundamentally a matter of form as well as content. I am not sure whether the style of The Limits of Critique is my voice—it is a way of writing I adopted for a specific purpose that may or may not appear again—but it seemed crucial, in tackling a book about critique's limits, to aim for a tone that was playful rather than censorious—or at least playfully censorious.

Information

Type
Theories and Methodologies
Information
PMLA , Volume 132 , Issue 2 , March 2017 , pp. 384 - 391
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2017

References

Works Cited

Ang, Ien. “From Cultural Studies to Cultural Research: Engaged Scholarship in the Twenty-First Century.” Cultural Studies Review, vol. 12, no. 2, 2006, pp. 183–97.Google Scholar
Bradway, Tyler. Queer Experimental Literature: The Affective Politics of Bad Reading. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavarero, Adriana. Inclinations: A Critique of Rectitude. Stanford UP, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavell, Stanley. Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of Essays. Cambridge UP, 2002.Google Scholar
Eagleton, Terry. “Not Just Anybody.” The London Review of Books, vol. 39, no. 1, 5 Jan. 2017, pp. 35–37.Google Scholar
Felski, Rita. “Comparison and Translation: A Perspective from Actor-Network Theory.” Comparative Literature Studies, vol. 53, no. 4, 2016, pp. 747–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felski, Rita. Doing Time: Feminist Theory and Postmodern Culture. New York UP, 2000.Google Scholar
Felski, Rita. “Introduction.” Recomposing the Humanities—with Bruno Latour, special issue of New Literary History, vol. 47, nos. 2–3, 2016, pp. 215–29.Google Scholar
Felski, Rita. The Limits of Critique. Chicago UP, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felski, Rita. “Modernist Studies and Cultural Studies: Reflections on Method.” Modernism/Modernity, vol. 10, no. 3, 2003, pp. 501–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felski, Rita. Uses of Literature. Blackwell Publishing, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haraway, Donna J. Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium:FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse: Feminism and Technoscience. Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar
Harman, Graham. Bruno Latour: Reassembling the Political. Pluto Press, 2014.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns. Translated by Porter, Catherine, Harvard UP, 2013.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford UP, 2007.Google Scholar
Moi, Toril. Revolution of the Ordinary: Literary Studies after Wittgenstein, Austin, and Cavell. Chicago UP, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulhern, Francis. Culture/Metaculture. Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar
Nehamas, Alexander. On Friendship. Basic Books, 2016.Google Scholar