Marginality, Canonicity, Passion

Dados Bibliográficos

ID5772201
AutoresDorothy Kempf (0000-0002-6140-2332), Pavlos Avlamis, Alessandro Barchiesi, Shadi Bartsch (0000-0003-3497-6530), Thomas H Beasley, Jo Billings (0000-0001-5974-1952), Emma Buckley (0000-0002-7937-9134), Serafina Cuomo (0000-0002-5063-9692), Emily Greenwood (0000-0003-0677-7649), Emily Hauser, Ralph Hexter, Lidia Klara, David Konstan (0000-0002-7264-8952), Pauline Leven, Glenn W Most, Irene Peirano Garrison, Mark We, Hindy Najman (0000-0002-9834-0534), Brooke Holmes (0000-0001-9984-1632), Robert F Goheen, Thomas S Thacher
EditoresMarco Formisano (0000-0002-5292-5211), Christina Shuttleworth Kraus
Ano2018
Páginas400
Data de publicação2018-07-19
Open AccessNão
TipoBOOK
PeriódicoMarginality, Canonicity, Passion (SOURCE_BOOK)
EditoraOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/oso/9780198818489.001.0001
OpenAlexW2726481416
Open LibraryOL30596876M
ISBN9780198818489
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas18

In recent years the discipline of classics has been experiencing a profound transformation, which affects not only methodologies and hermeneutic practices (i.e. how classicists read and interpret ancient literature) but also, and more importantly, the objects of study themselves (i.e. what they read and interpret). One of the most important factors has been the establishment of reception studies. The reception of classical literature and culture in later ages and/or in non-western cultures considerably expands the field. This temporal and cultural expansion has had many salutary effects. But reception studies has focused almost exclusively on the most canonical Greek and Latin texts, not only because they are valued per se but also because they have been received, rewritten, adapted, discussed, and alluded to on such a scale as to discourage discussion of other ancient texts, which were rarely or never the objects of significant reception. By definition, reception studies is uninterested in texts that have had no 'success' and thus, implicitly adopting canonicity as an unspoken criterion, it de facto marginalizes those ancient texts that were not blessed with a significant Nachleben. This volume is not a discussion of what is central, what is marginal, and why. Nor are we interested in exploring the powerful and complex connections between canonicity and, say, religion, politics, and power more generally. Rather, this volume aims at unveiling the many subtle implications of canonicity and marginality within the discipline, both at a theoretical and at a practical level

Art · Literature · Passion · Politics · Power (physics · Byzantine Studies and History · Classical Antiquity Studies · Classics · History · Law · Psychology · Canon (literature) · Classical literature · Classical literature, history and criticism · Congresses · History and criticism · Reader-response criticism