No description available.

No description available.

Tradução comentada da correspondência entre Henry James (Nova York, 1843 Londres, 1916) e Robert Louis Stevenson (Edimburgo, 1850 Samoa, 1894), inédita em português. A correspondência começou em dezembro de 1884, e se estendeu por uma década. As cartas revelam uma amizade algo improvável entre dois escritores muito diferentes, e um interesse compartilhado pela arte da ficção. O material analisado joga luz sobre uma discussão importante acerca da literatura em um momento decisivo, à véspera das transformações por que passaria no início do século XX. O ensaio introdutório visa reconstituir o curso dessa discussão e apontar algumas de suas implicações. / Annotated translation of the correspondence between Henry James (New York, 1843 London, 1916) and Robert Louis Stevenson (Edinburg, 1850 Samoa, 1894), unpublished in Portuguese. The correspondence began in December 1884 and lasted for a decade. The letters reveal an unlikely friendship between two very different writers and a shared concern for the art of fiction. The material examined sheds light on an important discussion about literature at a decisive moment, on the eve of the transformations that it was to undergo at the beginning of the twentieth century. The introductory essay seeks to recreate the course of this discussion and point some of its implications.

Thesis (Ph.D)--University of Alberta, 2010. / "A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of English and Film Studies, University of Alberta." Title from pdf file main screen (viewed on July 8, 2010). Includes bibliographical references.

Tradução comentada da correspondência entre Henry James (Nova York, 1843 Londres, 1916) e Robert Louis Stevenson (Edimburgo, 1850 Samoa, 1894), inédita em português. A correspondência começou em dezembro de 1884, e se estendeu por uma década. As cartas revelam uma amizade algo improvável entre dois escritores muito diferentes, e um interesse compartilhado pela arte da ficção. O material analisado joga luz sobre uma discussão importante acerca da literatura em um momento decisivo, à véspera das transformações por que passaria no início do século XX. O ensaio introdutório visa reconstituir o curso dessa discussão e apontar algumas de suas implicações. / Annotated translation of the correspondence between Henry James (New York, 1843 London, 1916) and Robert Louis Stevenson (Edinburg, 1850 Samoa, 1894), unpublished in Portuguese. The correspondence began in December 1884 and lasted for a decade. The letters reveal an unlikely friendship between two very different writers and a shared concern for the art of fiction. The material examined sheds light on an important discussion about literature at a decisive moment, on the eve of the transformations that it was to undergo at the beginning of the twentieth century. The introductory essay seeks to recreate the course of this discussion and point some of its implications.

<p>The purpose of this essay is to explore how different means are used to create indeterminate meaning in Henry James’s novella<em> The Turn of the Screw</em>. It suggests that the indeterminacy creates gaps in the text which the reader is required to fill in during the reading process, and that this indeterminacy is achieved chiefly through the use of an unreliable narrator and of ambiguity in the way the narrator relates the events that take place. The reliability of the narrator is called into question by her personal qualities as well as by narrative factors. Personal qualities that undermine the narrator’s reliability are youth, inexperience, nervousness, excitability and vanity. Narrative factors that damage the narrator’s reliability concern the story as manuscript, the narrator’s role in the story she narrates, and her line of argumentation. The ambiguity in the way events are reported is produced by ambiguous words, dismissed propositions and omissions. The essay demonstrates how the unreliable narrator and the ambiguity combine to make the reader question the narrator’s account and supply his or her own interpretation of key elements in the story, that is, how they invite the reader to “co-author” the text.</p>

This dissertation argues that the novels of Henry James offer a conception of personhood and of human freedom better able to explain and unify private law than the conceptions currently dominant in private law theory. I begin by laying out the two conceptual frameworks that now dominate private law theory: Kantian right and the feminist ethic of care. I argue that Kantian right‟s exclusive focus on respect for freedom of choice makes it unable to explain private law doctrines founded upon concern for human well-being, including unjust enrichment, unconscionability, and liability for negligence. However, feminism‟s ethic of care, which can be understood as a response to the Kantian abstraction from considerations of well-being and need, is also incomplete, because its understanding of the person as essentially connected to others fails to respect human separateness. I then offer readings of James‟ novels—The Portrait of a Lady, What Maisie Knew, and The Ambassadors—that show how vindicating individual worth requires both respect for abstract agency‟s separateness and freedom to choose, on the one hand, and concern for the dependent individual‟s well-being and autonomous flourishing, on the other. I argue that these two ideas are complementary parts of a complete understanding of human dignity and freedom. Finally, I argue that this understanding illuminates doctrines of private law that remain mysterious on the Kantian account while avoiding feminism‟s tendency to immerse private law in public law.

The purpose of this essay is to explore how different means are used to create indeterminate meaning in Henry James’s novella The Turn of the Screw. It suggests that the indeterminacy creates gaps in the text which the reader is required to fill in during the reading process, and that this indeterminacy is achieved chiefly through the use of an unreliable narrator and of ambiguity in the way the narrator relates the events that take place. The reliability of the narrator is called into question by her personal qualities as well as by narrative factors. Personal qualities that undermine the narrator’s reliability are youth, inexperience, nervousness, excitability and vanity. Narrative factors that damage the narrator’s reliability concern the story as manuscript, the narrator’s role in the story she narrates, and her line of argumentation. The ambiguity in the way events are reported is produced by ambiguous words, dismissed propositions and omissions. The essay demonstrates how the unreliable narrator and the ambiguity combine to make the reader question the narrator’s account and supply his or her own interpretation of key elements in the story, that is, how they invite the reader to “co-author” the text.

No description available.

This dissertation argues that the novels of Henry James offer a conception of personhood and of human freedom better able to explain and unify private law than the conceptions currently dominant in private law theory. I begin by laying out the two conceptual frameworks that now dominate private law theory: Kantian right and the feminist ethic of care. I argue that Kantian right‟s exclusive focus on respect for freedom of choice makes it unable to explain private law doctrines founded upon concern for human well-being, including unjust enrichment, unconscionability, and liability for negligence. However, feminism‟s ethic of care, which can be understood as a response to the Kantian abstraction from considerations of well-being and need, is also incomplete, because its understanding of the person as essentially connected to others fails to respect human separateness. I then offer readings of James‟ novels—The Portrait of a Lady, What Maisie Knew, and The Ambassadors—that show how vindicating individual worth requires both respect for abstract agency‟s separateness and freedom to choose, on the one hand, and concern for the dependent individual‟s well-being and autonomous flourishing, on the other. I argue that these two ideas are complementary parts of a complete understanding of human dignity and freedom. Finally, I argue that this understanding illuminates doctrines of private law that remain mysterious on the Kantian account while avoiding feminism‟s tendency to immerse private law in public law.