/
Modernity and Enchantment A Historiographic Review MIC Modernity and Enchantment A Historiographic Review MIC

Modernity and Enchantment A Historiographic Review MIC - PDF document

jane-oiler
jane-oiler . @jane-oiler
Follow
410 views
Uploaded On 2015-06-09

Modernity and Enchantment A Historiographic Review MIC - PPT Presentation

In recent years historians from disparate 64257elds have independently challenged the longstanding sociological view that modernity is characterized by disenchantment This view in its broadest terms maintains that wonders and marvels have been demys ID: 83048

recent years historians

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "Modernity and Enchantment A Historiograp..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

aminationoftherelateddiscoursesofmodernityasdisenchanted,whichassumedeitheraÒbinaryÓoraÒdialecticalÓformformuchofthepastcentury.WewillthenbeinapositiontoexaminetheemergingÒantinomialÓunderstandingofmodernityasenchantedinadisenchantedway.Thisantinomialapproachtothetopicofmo-dernityandenchantmentoffersacapaciouswaytoaddressahostofphenomenaformerlytreatedinamorelimitedandhierarchicalfashion,whichisoneofitsmoremarvelousfeatures.ÒMODERNITYÓISONEOFTHEMOSTAMBIGUOUSWORDSinthehistorianÕslexicon.Thetermisoftenusedasiftherewereacommonunderstandingofitsmeaning,whereasscholarscontinuetodeÞneitindifferentandsometimescontrastingways.(OnehistorianlikenedthetermtoaÒmultisidedroomofmirrors.Ó)3Inbroadoutline,modernityhascometosignifyamixtureofpolitical,social,intellectual,economic,technological,andpsychologicalfactors,severalofwhichcanbetracedtoearliercenturiesandothercultures,whichmergedsynergisticallyintheWestbetweenthesixteenthandnineteenthcenturies.Thesefactorsinclude(butarenotexhaustedby)theemergenceoftheautonomousandrationalsubject;thedifferentiationofculturalspheres;theriseofliberalanddemocraticstates;theturntopsychologismandself-reßexivity;andthedominanceofsecularism,nationalism,capitalism,industrialism,urbanism,consumerism,andscientism.Differentaccountsofmodernitymaystressdiversecombinationsoraccentuatesomefactorsmorethanothers.Thereisonecharacteristicofmodernity,however,thathasbeenemphasizedfairlyconsistentlybyintellectualssincetheeighteenthcentury:thatmodernityisÒdisenchanted.Ó43DavidHollinger,ÒTheKnowerandtheArtiÞcer,withPostscript1993,ÓinDorothyRoss,ed.,Mod-ernistImpulsesintheSocialSciences(Baltimore,Md.,1994),26.Anadequatesurveyoftheconceptofmodernitywouldrequireanessayinitsownright.AmongthemanyworksdevotedtoitareMarshallBerman,AllThatIsSolidMeltsintoAir:TheExperienceofModernity(Harmondsworth,1988);AnthonyJ.Cascardi,TheSubjectofModernity(Cambridge,1992);MateiCalinescu,FiveFacesofModernity(Durham,N.C.,1987);RitaFelski,TheGenderofModernity(Cambridge,Mass.,1995);DavidFrisby,FragmentsofModernity:TheoriesofModernityintheWorkofSimmel,Kracauer,andBenjamin(Cam-bridge,Mass.,1986);AnthonyGiddens,TheConsequencesofModernity(Stanford,Calif.,1990);HansUlrichGumbrecht,ÒAHistoryoftheConceptÔModern,ÕÓinGumbrecht,MakingSenseinLifeandLiterature,trans.GlenBurns(Minneapolis,Minn.,1992);Ju¬rgenHabermas,ThePhilosophicalDiscourseofModernity:TwelveLectures,trans.FrederickLawrence(Cambridge,Mass.,1987);StuartHall,DavidHeld,DonHubert,andKennethThompson,eds.,Modernity:AnIntroductiontoModernSocieties(Ox-ford,1996);JohnJervis,ExploringtheModern(Oxford,1998);LeszekKolakowski,ÒModernityonEnd-lessTrial,ÓinKolakowski,ModernityonEndlessTrial(Chicago,1990);ScottLashandJonathanFried-man,eds.,ModernityandIdentity(Oxford,1992);StephenToulmin,Cosmopolis:TheHiddenAgendaofModernity(NewYork,1990);CharlesTaylor,SourcesoftheSelf:TheMakingoftheModernIdentity(Cambridge,Mass.,1989);andBryanTurner,TheoriesofModernityandPostmodernity(London,1990).Foraspiritedinterrogationoftheconcept,seeBrunoLatour,WeHaveNeverBeenModern,trans.CatherinePorter(Cambridge,Mass.,1993).4SeeHansBlumenberg,TheLegitimacyoftheModernAge,trans.RobertM.Wallace(Cambridge,Mass.,1983);Brague,TheWisdomoftheWorld;MarcelGauchet,TheDisenchantmentoftheWorld:APoliticalHistoryofReligion,trans.OscarBurge(Princeton,N.J.,1997);JamesT.Kloppenberg,ÒDe-mocracyandDisenchantment:FromWebertoDeweytoHabermasandRorty,ÓinRoss,ModernistImpulsesintheSocialSciences AmericanJournalofSociology85,no.5(1980):1145Ð1179;EdwardShils,ÒMaxWeberandtheWorldsince1920,ÓinWolfgangMommsenandJu¬rgenOsterhammel,eds.,MaxWeberandHisContemporaries(London,1987),547Ð580;LawrenceA.Scaff,FleeingtheIronCage:Culture,Politics,andModernityintheThoughtofMaxWeber(Berkeley,Calif.,1989).6WebermayhavedrawnhisphrasefromSchiller,whosepoemÒDieGo¬tterGreichenlandsÓreferredtoÒdieentgo High-brow/Lowbrow:TheEmergenceofCulturalHierarchyinAmerica(Cambridge,Mass.,1988);BarbaraMariaStafford,ArtfulScience:EnlightenmentEntertainmentandtheEclipseofVisualEducation(Cam-bridge,Mass.,1994);andDominicStrinati,AnIntroductiontoTheoriesofPopularCulture(NewYork,1995).10Thisviewwasreiteratedin1976byBrunoBettelheim.Arguingforthepedagogicalimportanceoffairytalesforchildren,hemaintainedthatchildrenÕsthoughtisanimistic,likethatofÒallpreliteratepeopleÓ:ÒAchildtrustswhatthefairystorytells,becauseitsworldviewaccordswithhisown.ÓBet-telheim,TheUsesofEnchantment:TheMeaningandImportanceofFairyTales(NewYork,1976),45.11JohannP.Arnason,ÒReason,Imagination,Interpretation,ÓinGillianRobinsonandJohnRundell,eds.,RethinkingImagination:CultureandCreativity(London,1994),156Ð169;PatrickBrantlinger,TheReadingLesson:TheThreatofMassLiteracyinNineteenth-CenturyBritishFiction(Bloomington,Ind.,1998);JohnTinnonTaylor,EarlyOppositiontotheEnglishNovel:ThePopularReactionfrom1760to1830(NewYork,1943).TheanthropologistArjunAppaduraidescribesthedramaticshiftinattitudestowardfantasyandtheimaginationduringthecourseofthepasttwocenturies:ÒUntilrecently...acasecouldbemadethatfantasyandimaginationwereresidualpractices,conÞnedtospecialmomentsorplaces...[but]thisweighthasimperceptiblyshifted.Morepersonsthroughouttheworldseetheirlivesthroughtheprismsofpossiblelivesofferedbythemassmediainalltheirforms.Thatis,fantasyisnowasocialpractice;itenters,inahostofways,intothefabricationofsociallivesformanypeopleinmanysocieties.ÓAppadurai,ModernityatLarge:CulturalDimensionsofGlobalization(Minneapolis,Minn.,1997),53Ð54.12ChristopherHerbert,CultureandAnomie:EthnographicImaginationintheNineteenthCentury(Chicago,1991),35.13PeterLaslett,TheWorldWeHaveLost(1965;repr.,NewYork,2004).ForotherexplorationsofÒmodernityandnostalgia,ÓseeSylvianeAgacinski,TimePassing:ModernityandNostalgia(NewYork,2004);SvetlanaBoym,TheFutureofNostalgia(NewYork,2002);PeterFritzsche,StrandedinthePresent:696MichaelSalerAMERICANHISTORICALREVIEWJ (1981;repr.,NewYork,1988),2.16KeithThomas,ReligionandtheDeclineofMagic(NewYork,1971),ix.ModernityandEnchantment697AMERICANHISTORICALREVIEWJ FriedrichNietzscheexplicitlyequatedtheWesternÒfaithÓinreasonandsciencewithanirrationalbelief,onewhoseself-reßexivityundermineditselfsothatbythelatenineteenthcenturyitsadherentswereleftwithabeliefinnothing:17RobertDarnton,MesmerismandtheEndoftheEnlightenmentinFrance (Chicago, Abundance:ACulturalHistoryofAdvertisinginAmerica(NewYork,1994)andSomethingforNothing:LuckinAmerica(NewYork,2003),movedmoredecisivelyinthisdirection.Inthem,LearsoffersamorecomplexunderstandingoftheProtestantethicthanthatadvancedbyMaxWeber,whoidentiÞedProt-estantismasanimportantfactorintheemergenceofmoderninstrumentalrationality.InFablesofAbundance,LearshighlightstheantinomialaspectsofProtestantismthathavehelpedshapeWesternmodernity.Inadditiontoitsstressonrationalcalculation,whichWeberconsideredcentraltothedis-enchantmentoftheworld,LearspointstoacountervailingaspectofProtestantism,stemmingfromitsPietistbranch:anemphasisonsubjectivity,whichiscapableofimbuingthematerialworldwithsig-niÞcance.FablesofAbundancearguesagainstanotionofmoderndisenchantment,foranimisticten-denciescontinuetoexistinthemodernworldÑnotonlyincertainworksofeliteculture,butalsoinsomemanifestationsofmassculture,includingmodernadvertising.ModernitythusconsistsofboththeÒrational,managerialethosÓandananimisticcountertendency:ÒThroughoutthetwentiethcentury,peoplehaveimaginedalternativestothedisembodiedcorporatevisionofabundance;manyfastenedonthedetritusofcommoditycivilizationitselfastheyseekanotherwayofbeingintheworld.Bricolage,verbalorartifactual,hasbeenastrategyforreanimatingmatterÓ(10,133).AndinhishistoryoftheconceptofÒluckÓinAmericanculture,LearsdemonstratesasimilartensioninmodernAmericanculturebetweentheantinomiesofaProtestantÒcultureofcontrolÓandthemorepagan(aswellaspietisticandscientiÞc)celebrationsoftheÒcultureofchance.ÓLearsÕsworkhasbeenimplicitlyconcernedwithex-ploringthedifferentformsofspeciÞcallymodernenchantments,anticipatingthespateofrecentworksthataddressthetopicdirectly.31AnothersignofthechangingreceptiontotheconceptofmodernenchantmentcanbefoundinworksonthepoetandoccultistWilliamButlerYeats.EarlybiographiesandliterarystudiestendedtominimizeYeatsÕsprofoundandlifelonginterestintheoccult,butthetwo-volumebiographybyhistorianRoyFosterunabashedlydepictsoccultismascentraltohislifeandworkÑindeed,worthyofasubtitle:RoyFoster,W.B.Yeats:ALife,vol.1: ofwonderimaginable.DastonandParkÕsapparentconformitytothebinaryapproachcanalsobeat-tributedtotheirowndisciplinaryfocusonthemedievalandearlymodernÞelds:althoughtheydotouchverybrießyonthemodernperiod,theirsisnotahistoryofmodernenchantment.Indeed,theiranalysisofthemanyfacetsofÒwonderÓbetweenthetwelfthandthelateseventeenthcenturiesissonuancedthathadtheyattemptedanequallysustainedexaminationofthemodernperiod,onesuspectstheywouldhavequaliÞedorrejectedthebinaryapproachaltogether.Theiraccountprovidesastutecontextualanalysesoftermsthat,tomoderneyes,mightseemsocloselyre-latedastobeindistinguishable.ThereaderlearnsmuchaboutthespeciÞcmeaningsatparticulartimesofmarvels,wonders,prodigies,miracles,monstrosities,thesu-pernatural,andthepreternatural.Theprofusionofexamplesandillustrationsare world.ButtheydoarguethateliteshavedeÞneditasadisreputablepassionandconsignedittotherealmofthevulgar,whereitcontinuestoßourishwithinmassculture.Thisargumentconstitutestheirthirdinnovatorystance:theWestbecamedisenchantedinthelateseventeenthandeighteenthcenturiesbecauseofsocialfac- empiricalscienceandtheunquantiÞable,allofwhichweretobecentraltonine-teenth-andtwentieth-centuryunderstandingsofÒmodernenchantment.ÓTheirhis-toryendswithbinariesratherthanantinomies.Fortunately,DastonandParkÕshis-toryisnotreallyaboutthemodernperiod.Theirbriefconclusionsaboutmoderndisenchantmentshouldbeunderstoodasthelastgaspofthetenaciousbinaryap-proach,whereastheremainderoftheirbrilliantstudystandsasanauthoritativeaccountofpremodernenchantment.Scholarsinterestedinmodernenchantmentwoulddowelltoconsultitnotonlyfornecessarybackgroundmaterial,butasamodelofhowthesubjectcanbepursued.ThehistoriesofmodernenchantmenttowhichwenowturnmightbeconsideredinadvertentsequelstoWondersandtheOrderofNature,1150Ð1750,astheyprovideanswerstotwocriticalquestionsthatthisworkraisesaboutenchantmentintheWestsincetheeighteenthcentury.TheÞrsthastodowiththewaysmodernelitesne-gotiatedtheissueofscienceandenchantment,andthesecondhastodowithhow 706MichaelSalerAMERICANHISTORICALREVIEWJ `cleÒremainedpoisedbetweenadherencetoandrepudiationofVic-toriannaturalscience,Óincludingthoseinvolvedinpsychicalresearchandpsychol-ogy.45Mesmerism,initsmoreÒscientiÞcÓguiseofhypnotism,representedthetenseequilibriumofantinomiescharacteristicofmodernity:ÒVictorianhypnotismcon-44Ibid.,86.HequoteswithapprovalDavidBlackbournÕsassertionthatMarpingenÒdidnotrepresentaclashbetweentraditionandmodernity,butfedoffmanyconßictsofanuneven,uneasyworld.ÓBlack-bourn,Marpingen:ApparitionsoftheVirginMaryinBismarckianGermany(Oxford,1995),407;RuthHarris,Lourdes:BodyandSpiritinaSecularAge(NewYork,1999).SeealsoPeterBowler, traditionofnaturphilosophiehadnotcompletelydisappeared.Indeed,attheturnofthecentury,theidealistcurrentswererevivedinvariousformsoflebensphilosophie,renderingtheoccultistsÕpreoccupationwithaÒscientiÞcÓexplorationoftheÒsoulÓamoreintellectuallycoherententerpriseinGermanythanitwasinBritain,whichhadamoreempiricalandinductivetraditionformostofthenineteenthcentury.53ButTreiteldoesnotclaimthattheGermanoccultistswerealwaysscientiÞcwhentheywerenot,orthattheywerecommittedtoformalrationalitywhentheyweremoreinterestedinotherepistemologies.Bytheearlytwentiethcentury,manyoftheGermanoccultistsacknowledgedthattheirinterestintranscendentalstatesofcon-sciousnesswasnotalwayscompatiblewithclaimstoscientiÞcobjectivity,andfocusedinsteadonthepragmaticapplicationsoftheirownexplorationsoftheself.54Itwasthisßexiblefocusonself-knowledgeandself-realization,thecreationofaÒtran- studydoesnotoverturnthisnegativepictureofmasscultureentirely,althoughshedoesshowthatelitesnolessthanthemassesfoundmassculturetobeanimportantdomainthatgratiÞedtheiryearningsformodernwonders,andfacilitatedtheirne-gotiationoftheconßictingmeaningsofmodernity.However,otherrevisionistac-countsofmodernityandenchantmenthavegonefurther,arguingthatmasscultureitselfhasbecomethepurveyorofspeciÞcallyrationalandsecularformsofenchant-JamesW.CookÕsTheArtsofDeception:PlayingwithFraudintheAgeofBarnum,forexample,suggeststhaturbanmasscultureinAmericaduringtheantebellumperiodwasoftenself-reßexive,rational,ironical,andskepticalÑinotherwords,dis-enchanted.Butthisformofdisenchantmentalsoyieldedenchantment:showmensuchasP.T.BarnumormodernmagicianschallengedtheiraudiencestospottheirÒartfuldeceptions,Ówhichgeneratedmuchoftheentertainmentvalueoftheshows.Barnumhimselfstatedinthemid-nineteenthcentury,Òthepublicappearstobedisposedtobeamusedevenwhentheyareconsciousofbeingdeceived.Ó59JeanRobert-Houdin,whorevolutionizedthepracticeofmagicinEuropeandAmericaatthistime,similarlyconstruedmagicasaself-reßexiveformofentertainmentbydeÞningthemagicianasanactorwhoisplayingamagician.60AmericanaudienceswerechallengedbysuchwondersastheÒFeejeeMermaidÓortheÒautomatonchessplayerÓtodeterminewhethertheywerereal,andifnot,howsuchlifelikeillusionswerecreated.Inthisway,masscultureelicitedthecognitivepassionofwonderdis-cussedbyDastonandPark,inwhichnoveltiesstimulatecuriosity,thesatisfactionofwhichisendlesslydeferredbytheproductionofnewwonders.Cookdemonstrateshowshowmenexpertlymanipulatedthenewmassmedia,suchasnewspapers,topromotedebatesabouttheauthenticityoftheirexhibits,yieldingÒanew,media-drivenformofcuriosityÑperpetuallyexcited,yetneverfullysatisÞed.Ó61Further,hearguesthattheseenchantmentsinculcatedintheiraudiencesanironicandskepticaloutlook.MassculturepromotedEnlightenmentrationalityratherthaneclipsedit,involvingÒenchantmentanddisenchantment,energeticpublicexpose 712MichaelSalerAMERICANHISTORICAL partofournormalcondition,andfar