Father of the English Dominican Province (London: Burns Oates and Washbourne, 1915), 8:11–12. Thomas Aquinas, The “ Summa Theologica” of St. Yates makes this point via Richard Halpern’s The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation: English Renaissance Culture and the Genealogy of Capital (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell UP, 1991), 136–75. Catherine Porter (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 2004), 187, 189.
UTOPIA BY THOMAS MORE HOW TO
Bruno Latour, Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy, trans. Mary Floyd-Wilson and Garrett A Sullivan, Jr. Julian Yates, “Humanist Habitats or, ‘Eating Well’ with Thomas More’s Utopia,” Environment and Embodiment in Early Modern England, ed. Terry Eagleton, William Shakespeare (New York: Blackwell, 1986), 93. Raymond Williams, “Nature,” Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society, rev. in Lawrence Buell, The Future of Environmentalism: Environmental Criticism and Literary Imagination (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell), 21. in Greg Garrard, Ecocriticism (New York: Routledge, 2004), 3. Gabriel Egan, Green Shakespeare: From Ecopolitics to Ecocriticism (New York: Routledge, 2006), 25.īut our reading does not test the boldest aspect of Egan’s claim: we do not look for modern scientific theories to validate Utopia’s model for an accord between nature and society.Ĭheryll Glotfelty qtd. (New York: Palgrave, 2007), 187–209 and “Counting Sheep: Dolly Does Utopia (Again),” rhizomes.08 (Spring 2004). On Utopia, Julian Yates has published two stimulating, though overlapping, essays: “Humanist Habitats or, ‘Eating Well’ with Thomas More’s Utopia,” Environment and Embodiment in Early Modern England, ed. Sullivan, Jr.’s, collection Environment and Embodiment in Early Modern England (2007) are beginning to change the critical landscape of early modern studies, there is no denying that ecocriticism has flourished more in the criticism of the British Romantic period and in American studies. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.Īlthough recent books such as Gabriel Egan’s Green Shakespeare (2006), Robert Watson’s Back to Nature (Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 2006), and Mary Floyd-Wilson and Garrett A. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. Tillyard’s Elizabethan World Picture might “in some surprising ways be objectively true.” 2 Keywords This, at least, seems to be what Gabriel Egan recommends in his Green Shakespeare when he boldly claims that E.M.W. One could say that if Marxists, feminists, and new historicists worked hard to denaturalize nature, then ecocritics are trying very hard to renaturalize nature, and, in the process, to naturalize aspects of human society. Concepts such as the Great Chain of Being, based on a set of correspondences between nature and human society, although interrogated vigorously by Marxists, feminists, and new historicists to the point that many feel they are now permanently discredited, offer ecocriticism a model for ecological kinship between a widely used early modern set of metaphors and the real. Yet one would think that the early modern terrain, not yet blighted by the mediating factors of industry, and permeated with literary, religious, and popular metaphors of nature-culture kinship, would offer ecocritics an especially fertile territory from which potentially to recover a harmonious accord between nature and society. 1 This can be explained in part by the preindustrial character of an early modern economy, which did not have to contend with large-scale exploitation of natural resources, nor with the pollution of air, water, and soil that troubles ecocritics today. Thomas More’s Utopia (1516) has not received a great deal of serious ecocritical attention, despite its representation of a purportedly ideal environment in which nature and society exist in perfect harmony.
0 kommentar(er)
