2. 职称英语
  3. The two articles arouse suspicion. The theory? The novel? Since there is no

The two articles arouse suspicion. The theory? The novel? Since there is no

游客2025-04-15  4
问题     The two articles arouse suspicion. The theory? The novel? Since there is no such thing as the novel, how can there be a single theory? Or is the editor some soil of monist? Blinkered hedgehog in wild fox country? The jacket identifies in wild fox country? The jacket identifies Mr. Halperin as "Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of English at the University of Southern California." This is true academic weight. "He is also the author of The Language of Meditation: Four Studies in Nineteenth-Century Fiction and Egoism and Self-Discovery in the Victorian Novel." Well, meditation if not language is big in Southern California, where many an avocado tree shades its smogbound Zen master, while the Victorian novel continues to be a growth industry in Academe. Eagerly, one turns to Professor Halperin’s "A Critical Introduction" to nineteen essays by as many professors of English Professor Halperin has not an easy way with our rich language. Nevertheless, one opens his book in the hope that the prose of "some of the most distinguished critics of our time" will be better than his own.
    American professors of English have never had an easy time with French theoreticians of the novel(close scrutiny of the quotation from Barthes reveals that it was taken from an English not an American translation). Nevertheless, despite various hedges like "may inevitably, " Professor Halperin has recklessly enrolled himself in the school of Paris(class of 56). As a result, he believes that the autonomous novel "is not created as a conscious representation of anything outside itself. " Aside from the presumption of pretending to know what any writer has in mind(is he inevitably but not consciously describing or mimicking the real world?), it is native to assume that a man-made novel can ever resemble a meteor fallen from outer space, a perfectly autonomous artifact whose raison detre is "with the relationships among the various structural elements within the work of fiction itself rather than "between reader and text". Apparently the novel is no longer what James conceived it, a story told, in Professor Halperin’s happy phrase, from "the limited perspective of a single sentient consciousness". And so, in dubious battle, unconscious sentiencies clash in the English departments of the West with insentient consciousnesses.
    In general, Professor Halperin’s novel-theorists have nothing very urgent or interesting to say about literature. Why then do they write when they have nothing to say? Because the ambitious teacher can only rise in the academic bureaucracy by writing at complicated length about writing that has already been much written about. The result of all this book-chat cannot interest anyone who knows literature while those who would like to learn something about books can only be mystified and discouraged by these commentaries. Certainly it is no accident that the number of students taking English courses has been in decline for some years. But that is beside the point. What matters is that the efforts of the teachers now under review add up to at least a half millennium of academic tenure.
    Rebirth of the novel? That seems unlikely. The University-novel tends to be stillborn, suitable only for classroom biopsy. The Public-novel continues to be written but the audience for it is reading anything at all difficult and unrewarding. Ambitious novelists are poignantly aware of the general decline in what Professor Halperin would call "reading skills". Much of Mr. Donald Barthelme’s means to be ironic. Of course he knows his book is not very interesting to read, but then life is not very interesting to live, either. Hopefully, as Professor Halperin would say, the book will self-destruct once it has been ritually praised wherever English is taught but not learned.  [br] The author differentiates between two types of novels:______.
选项 A、one artfully created for people who love to read, the other slopped together for scholastic analysis
B、one well-written and intended for scholars, the other poorly-written and intended for the public
C、those that are worthwhile and those that are produced for the mass-market
D、one that is lifeless and meant for analysis by the public, the other poorly-written and meant for the reading enjoyment of the public
答案 B
解析 本题为细节分析题。根据文中第四段中的“The University-novel tends to bestillborn，suitable only for classroom biopsy．The Public-novel continues to be written but theaudience for it is reading anything at all difficult and unrewarding．”可知，两类小说的对象分别为大学和大众，大学类小说仅适合上课使用，而大众小说阅读起来没有困难，但也不值得读。B选项符合原文意思。A选项说“为喜欢阅读的人巧妙创作的小说”不符合原文意思。C选项说“值得阅读的小说”，但原文却是大学类小说仅适合于课堂使用，故C选项与原文意思相反。D选项全部都是为大众阅读的小说，没有大学类小说，故排除。因此，B选项为正确选项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/4038712.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)