No description available.

No description available.

Drawing on criminological history, visual studies, modernist scholarship, sociological treatises, and theories of archives and collection, this study proposes that literary texts of the early twentieth century approached the problem of knowing and representing others through collections. Inspired by the supposed divide between the city and the small town, modernist writers depict—but also resist—a vision of the group and the individual as inscrutable. The criminological apparatus of the turn of the century attends to both urban and provincial modes of existence, promising the small circles, close study of individuals, and knowability of the small town while also acceding to the urban vision of people in vast unknowable quantities and a perpetual psychic distance from others. Criminology was positioned, and positioned itself, as decidedly modern in its data-driven approach to managing the presumed unknowability of the individual and the group. The texts in this study continually grapple with accessing individual identity amidst the masses of modern humanity, and articulate this struggle through representation of small groups, circles, and coteries. It is through the enclosed set of people that Sherwood Anderson, Gertrude Stein, and Carl Van Vechten demonstrate a fixation on both the individual and the group, and the relationship between the two. Their literary output and personal associations—which center on observation, portraiture, and collection—are fundamentally criminological in their efforts to negotiate the distance and intimacy of modern life.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Essa tese analisa a obra literária dos escritores Sherwood Anderson (1876-1941) e Jack London (1876-1916) produzida nos anos 1900-1910, procurando compreender a maneira como se deu o diálogo entre a ficção e a realidade histórica, como aquela produziu uma leitura e uma interpretação desta, sobretudo no que tange às mudanças no sentido histórico do trabalho. Dado o fato de que ambos os escritores em questão viveram num momento decisivo de transformação histórica nos Estados Unidos, quando na transição entre o século XIX e XX se estabeleceram novas dinâmicas sociais e econômicas, articuladas estas com a consolidação do capitalismo de regime monopolista, essas literaturas trazem em seu corpo as cicatrizes históricas dos esforços de adaptação e compreensão desse processo. Atrelada a essa momentosa transição em curso, havia o fato de que ambos os escritores eram trabalhadores, e num momento crucial da formação da classe trabalhadora estadunidense, quando as transformações materiais impunham severas readequações na divisão do trabalho, na organização produtiva estrutural, na estratificação social dele oriunda, nas respostas políticas de resistência deles, e também nos sentidos subjetivos que o trabalho e o trabalhar poderiam possuir. Por conta de tudo isto, a literatura de Sherwood Anderson e Jack London produz uma interpretação ficcional dessa experiência histórica, permitindo com que se rastreie e compreenda como as velhas tradições do \"Evangelho do trabalho\" dos Oitocentos foram sendo brutalmente modificadas pela dinâmica produtiva de ordem fabril, pelo controle financeiro, pela concentração econômica e pela acentuação da exploração capitalista pelo regime monopólico. Essa situação, dadas as particularidades biográficas e os históricos de formação das regiões onde viveram os dois escritores (um do Meio-Oeste, outro do Extremo Oeste dos Estados Unidos), foi traduzida ora como crise de consciência íntima, ora como uma grande crise civilizacional que a punha em pé de igualdade com a selvageria da natureza. Ambas, pois, fornecem ao historiador chaves analíticas com as quais pensar a mudança do lugar e do sentido histórico do trabalho naquele processo, e como essa mudança participava da formação da classe trabalhadora, tanto em sentidos estruturais quanto subjetivos, tanto progressistas como conservadores. / This thesis analyzes the literary work of writers Sherwood Anderson (1876-1941) and Jack London (1876-1916) produced in the years 1900-1910, aiming at understanding the way how the dialogue between fiction and historical reality happened, how the former produced a reading and interpretation of the latter, especially regarding to shifts in the historical meaning of labor. Given the fact that both writers concerned lived in a decisive moment of historical transformation in the United States, when in the transition between the 19th and the 20th century new social and economical dynamics were established, articulated with the consolidation of the capitalism of monopolist regime, these writings bring in their body the historical scars of the efforts of adaptation and comprehension of this process. Attached to this momentous ongoing transition, there was the fact that both writers were workers, and during a crucial moment of the formation of the US working class, when the material transformations imposed severe readjustments in the division of labor, in the structural productive organization, in the social stratification originated from it, in the political answers of resistance from them, and also in the subjective senses that labor and work could have. Due to all that, the literature of Sherwood Anderson and Jack London produces a fictional interpretation of this historical experience, allowing to track and understand how the old traditions of the Gospel of work of the Eighteen hundreds were being brutally modified by the productive dynamics of the manufacturing industry, by the financial control, by the economic concentration and by the intensification of the capitalist exploration by the monopolistic regime. This situation, given the biographic particularities and the historical formation of the regions where the two writers lived (one from the Midwest, the other from the Far West of the United States), has been translated sometimes as a crisis of intimate consciousness, sometimes as a big civilizational crisis that put it on an equal footing with the wildness of nature. Both, therefore, provide the historian with analytical keys with which to think the shift of place and historical sense of labor in that process, and how this shift participated in the formation of the working class, both in structural and subjective senses, both progressives and conservatives.

No description available.

Scholarship has firmly established that the short story cycle is well-suited to representations of community. This study considers eight North American examples of the genre: four by Canadian authors Stephen Leacock, Duncan Campbell Scott, George Elliott, and Alice Munro; and four by American authors Sarah Orne Jewett, Sherwood Anderson, John Cheever, and Joyce Carol Oates. My original idea was to discover whether there were significant differences between the Canadian and American cycles, but ultimately I became far more interested in the way that all of the cycles address community formation and disintegration. The focus of each cycle is a small community, whether a small town, a village, or a suburb. In all of the examples, the authors address the small community as the focus of anxiety, concern, criticism, and praise, with special attention to the way in which, despite its manifold failings, the small community continues to inspire longings for the ideal home and source of identity. The narrative feature that ultimately provided the critical framework for the study is the recurring presence of the metropolis in all of the eight cycles. The city, set on the horizons of these small communities, consistently provides a backdrop against which author and characters seem to measure and understand their lives. Always an influence (whether for good or bad), the city’s presence is constructed as the other against which the small community’s identity is formulated and understood. The relationship between small community and city led me to an investigation into the mythology of the small community, a mythology that sets the small community in opposition to the city, portraying the former as the keeper of virtue and the latter as the disseminator of vice. The cycles themselves, as I increasingly discovered, challenge the mythology by identifying how the small community depends, in large part, on the city for self-understanding. The small community, however, as an idea, and a mythic ideal, is never dismissed as obsolete or irrelevant.

Scholarship has firmly established that the short story cycle is well-suited to representations of community. This study considers eight North American examples of the genre: four by Canadian authors Stephen Leacock, Duncan Campbell Scott, George Elliott, and Alice Munro; and four by American authors Sarah Orne Jewett, Sherwood Anderson, John Cheever, and Joyce Carol Oates. My original idea was to discover whether there were significant differences between the Canadian and American cycles, but ultimately I became far more interested in the way that all of the cycles address community formation and disintegration. The focus of each cycle is a small community, whether a small town, a village, or a suburb. In all of the examples, the authors address the small community as the focus of anxiety, concern, criticism, and praise, with special attention to the way in which, despite its manifold failings, the small community continues to inspire longings for the ideal home and source of identity. The narrative feature that ultimately provided the critical framework for the study is the recurring presence of the metropolis in all of the eight cycles. The city, set on the horizons of these small communities, consistently provides a backdrop against which author and characters seem to measure and understand their lives. Always an influence (whether for good or bad), the city’s presence is constructed as the other against which the small community’s identity is formulated and understood. The relationship between small community and city led me to an investigation into the mythology of the small community, a mythology that sets the small community in opposition to the city, portraying the former as the keeper of virtue and the latter as the disseminator of vice. The cycles themselves, as I increasingly discovered, challenge the mythology by identifying how the small community depends, in large part, on the city for self-understanding. The small community, however, as an idea, and a mythic ideal, is never dismissed as obsolete or irrelevant.