Futurist Geographies: Uneven Modernities and the Struggle for Aesthetic Autonomy: Paris, Italy, Russia, 1909–1914

Ram, Harsha

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195338904.013.0013

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…373, 479). Аналізуючи зв'язок національного та космополітичного у творчості футуристів, дослідник Харша Рам наполягає на «євразійському мультикультуралізмі» як головній рушійній силі творчості гілейців (Ram 2013). Використовуючи різні національні елементи, актуалізуючи їх, вони спиралися радше на етнічне розмаїття, аніж на національну самобутність.…”

Section: Dariia Demchenkounclassified

«Ideology at Its Purest»: Whose modernism?

Demchenko

2023

TXIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this review, I aim to analyse the catalogue «In the Eye of the Storm: Modernism in Ukraine, 1900–1930s». The project bearing the same name, for which the catalogue was prepared, commenced in the autumn of 2022 at the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum (Madrid), essentially becoming the first extensive exhibition dedicated to the work of modernist artists in the territory of contemporary Ukraine since 2007. Modernism is an international phenomenon characterised by various movements and ideas, that incorporate local elements into art. However, post-Soviet states instrumentalised knowledge of modernism, seeking to recreate a «tradition» disrupted by the Soviet regime. This involves juxtaposing the modernist movement with socialist realism. The authors of the reviewed publication also adopted this approach: to construct a «national» past, they resorted to the cultural nationalisation of modernism. This is achieved, in part, by using terms such as «Ukrainian modernism/avant-garde», blending ideological traditions of modernity and modernism, and so on. In my text, I aim to clarify these processes and demonstrate the inappropriateness of defining the national identity of artists who worked in the territory of contemporary Ukraine from the 1900s to the 1930s, as well as the appropriation of modernism by one country or another.

show abstract

Section: Dariia Demchenkounclassified

«Ideology at Its Purest»: Whose modernism?

Demchenko

2023

TXIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This impulse can best be seen in The Oxford Handbook of Global Modernisms , which adopts a largely Jamesonian definition of what it means to “globalize” modernism . If modernist form results from certain economic structures, as Jameson argues, then it stands to reason that similar socioeconomic dispensations can also produce modernist literature in such spatially and temporally distant locales as interwar Italy and Russia (Ram), post‐WWII Nigeria (Lazarus; Lincoln), and 1950s South Africa (Morris).…”

Section: From Postcolonialism To Hegel: Marxist Interpretations Of Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Literary History of World‐Systems, I: Marxist Lineages

Eatough

2015

Literature Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay is the first of a two-part series on the use of world-systems theory in literary studies. It argues that the recent popularity of world-systems theory among literary scholars has raised important questions about how we practice literary history. Appeals to a more "global" configuration of world literary space seem to promise a more inclusive literary history, but world-systems theory's expansive focus also clashes with literary studies' traditional definitions of cultural activity. In order to investigate this tension, the essay begins by examining the birth of world-systems theory. It shows how world-systems theory grew out of a number of intersecting currents in academic scholarship, including Marxist economics, dependista theory, and Annales historiography. The essay then proceeds to trace literary studies' earliest engagements with world-systems theory. As I show, these initial engagements took place within two distinct critical traditions: (1) in the Subaltern Studies project, which diagnosed intellectual production as an effect of the global division of labor; and (2) in Jamesonian Marxism, which attempted to map literature onto the world-system under the aegis of a leftist Hegelianism. The essay concludes by analyzing how these projects have helped to redefine the nature of the relationship between literary production and economic systems.In their introduction to the volume Immanuel Wallerstein and the Problem of the World, David Palumbo-Lui, Bruce Robbins, and Nirvana Tanoukhi sum up the ambivalence literary critics have felt toward world-systems theory. On the one hand, the concept of a world-system would seem, in their words, to "satisfy our own most fervent inclinations … for greater inclusiveness and conceptual reform" (4). This inclination was a prime motivation behind world-systems theory's earliest articulations, which sought to answer a deceptively simple question: why, when postcolonial nations were modernizing their economic institutions and infrastructure at a breakneck pace, did they seem to be continually falling further and further behind Western nations? For such noted historians as Immanuel Janet Abu-Lughod, the only way to explain this continued disparity was to shift one's attention away from these nations themselves and onto the structure of the world economy. By taking the world economy as a single "unit" of analysis, these scholars argued, one could see how inequality was produced within the very trade networks connecting Western and postcolonial states together -inequalities that remained invisible when looking at the nation alone (Wallerstein 1974, 15). For those literary critics who have adopted a world-systems perspective, the goal has been much the same: to show how a more abstract, structuralist model of world literary space might be able to uncover hitherto unnoticed inequalities within the production and reception of culture. Indeed, if Euro-American criticism has long excluded a majority of the world's creative products under the questionable rubric of "great [read...

show abstract

Futurist Geographies: Uneven Modernities and the Struggle for Aesthetic Autonomy: Paris, Italy, Russia, 1909–1914

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

«Ideology at Its Purest»: Whose modernism?

«Ideology at Its Purest»: Whose modernism?

The Literary History of World‐Systems, I: Marxist Lineages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About