Titlebook: Coleridge’s Sublime Later Prose and Recent Theory; Kristeva, Adorno, Ra Murray J. Evans Book 2023 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Aut

commensurate

MOCK

,Touchstones for Sublimity: Coleridge’s , (1816–17) and the 1818 Lectures on Literature,and weak politics to define the distance his later prose must go for the reform he desires. In two lectures on the Middle Ages (1818), including his oft-quoted scene in a Gothic cathedral, Coleridge’s invocation of the sublime signals a more heterogeneous symbolism that cracks the mould of symbol as

gorgeous

,Sublime Boundaries of Belief and Unbelief: Coleridge’s , (wr. 1824) and Julia Kristeva’s , (2006),ination of psychoanalysis, Christianity, and agnosticism. Otherwise her sense of the “semiotic” informs a sublime discourse neither symbolic nor sublime in Coleridge’s senses, yet reminiscent of Coleridge’s transition in his lectures away from symbolism and towards a more expansive sublime. Thus Kri

量被毁坏

Pert敏捷

,Sublime Politics: Coleridge’s , (1829) and Jacques Rancière’s , (2011),croppers in the American 1930s. In spite of Rancière’s expressed aversion to the sublime, his discourse is sublime in effect. Contrasts with Coleridge’s metaphysical care with symbol and Idea highlight the relative conceptual looseness of Rancière’s “symbol,” “spiritual,” and “material” and his trea

Intact

,Conclusion: The Sublime in Coleridge, Kristeva, Adorno, and Rancière,the problem of yoking abstract reasoning or conceptualizing with a sublime aesthetic that challenges and exceeds articulation. This section focuses on what Rancière calls his “intellectual anarchy”: his rejection of received views and the conceptual dispersion in his scenes. The chapter concludes on

Jingoism

itics in the sublime theory and practice of this central Romantic author and three of his important successors: Julia Kristeva, Theodor Adorno, and Jacques Rancière...978-3-031-25529-8978-3-031-25527-4

荣幸

investigate

休息

Werner Bergmann,Marianna Grüters modern art. Adorno’s thoroughgoing rejection of symbolism, “the unity of the universal and the particular,” retrospectively clarifies Coleridge’s more gradual departure from the symbolism of .. Reading Coleridge’s depiction of the sublime Gothic cathedral in his 1818 lectures, moreover, illuminates