Thesis (Ph. D.)--Lehigh University, 2001. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 129-137).

The interview focuses on McAlmon's Chinese Opera, a collection which won the Governor General's Award for poetry in 1980. Scobie also discusses other writers in the circle around Gertrude Stein in Paris in the 1920s, and some of Scobie's contempories.

This thesis attempts to describe the similarities and the differences between Boyle's position and Locke's on the primary and secondary quality distinction. / It is in the Corpuscular Hypothesis that Boyle draws the distinction between primary and secondary qualities. Locke not only accepts the Corpuscular Hypothesis but also presents some arguments to support it. / Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 respectively examine the differences in the positions of Boyle and Locke on primary and secondary qualities, in their lists of primary qualities, the terminologies they employ, and the scopes of their discussions. Little attention has previously been paid to these differences. / Chapter 3 discusses the essence of the primary/secondary quality distinction. My point is that the distinction between primary and secondary qualities is really a distinction between two kinds of powers for both Boyle and Locke.

No description available.

The resurgence of modern periodical studies has expanded our understanding of “littleqrdquo; magazines and the editors behind them, but many studies continue to be restricted to the 1920s, examine male editors, and focus on well–established literary journals, rather than the subversive magazines that expanded the reign of modernism in the years from 1910 to 1950. These studies, though fascinating, privilege a select few and leave many lost to the archive. The new theory of book history and those who evaluate the book as a material object that is designed to circulate among a range of publics provide powerful and useful frameworks for recognizing the significance of what had previously been considered mere data. This study focuses on several neglected female little magazine editors who, despite various obstacles, powerfully intervened in the modernism debates throughout the 1910s through to the late 1940s by shaping successful publications to invite public appreciation of values they espoused. Unlike canonical modernist figures such as Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot who championed an elite style of modernism that was usually inaccessible to most, Lola Ridge, Gwendolyn Bennett, Caresse Crosby, and Kay Boyle encouraged diversity and fostered heterogeneity by selecting and juxtaposing material by new writers and artists who moved easily around and over the borders separating high art and mass culture, who recovered marginalized voices from history, and who appealed for social justice. Further, their traditional and non–traditional roles while they served as editors show that in many cases being an editor meant more than just choosing works and arranging them. One chapter is devoted to Lola Ridge, the American literary editor of Broom (1922-1923). Ridge was a cosmopolitan modernist who welcomed a broad audience to Broom and invited readers to champion styles of writing and artwork that contained strong social commentary with American subjects, instead of copying European models that many argued were created for art's sake. Another chapter focuses on African American poet, graphic artist and literary columnist, Gwendolyn Bennett, who held several editorial roles at Opportunity, Fire!!, and Black Opals, from the mid–1920s until the early 1930s. A heterodox modernist, Bennett skillfully discussed and placed artistic work by members of the New Negro movement next to the work by their forefathers, subsequently fostering congeniality between the two conflicting literary groups and promoting a united front during the development of the Harlem Renaissance. She also promoted co–operation between black and white artists and writers with her universally themed poetry, graphic art, and literary column. Chapter four centers on Black Sun Press book publisher, novelist, and poet, Caresse Crosby, owner and editor of Portfolio (1945-1948), who challenged artistic reception on both sides of the Atlantic by bringing glamorous modernism to her unbound journal of eclectic work. Crosby promoted co–operation between artists and writers from conflicting World War II countries through the placement and types of materials she published on the pages of her magazine. The epilogue calls for scholars to expand their view of the modernist project and recover the often “hidden” work by overlooked female little magazine editors. Like Ridge, Bennett, and Crosby before her, Kay Boyle (This Quarter 1927-1929), who can be linked to each editor (directly or indirectly), relied on her trusted network of friends as she edited This Quarter. Her editorial support for young and experienced artists who used innovative styles and her commitment to social justice parallels her colleagues' dedication to the modernist project. These women's labor, the significant literary time periods they worked in, the different genres, critical content, and styles of modernism they championed, and the social formations their journals produced expanded the base of modernism and reinvigorated American art and literature between the Wars, leaving a legacy for future artists and writers.

No description available.

No description available.

La thèse porte sur le statut du corps dans la philosophie de Spinoza. Une première partie de la thèse reconstruit la façon dont Spinoza thématise la corporéité, à partir du Court Traité et du problème de l’attribution à Dieu d’une nature étendue. En outre, on démontre aussi que la position qu’on trouve dans l’Ethique est le résultat d’un travail intellectuel qui n’était pas encore accompli au début de l’itinéraire de Spinoza. En particulier, on souligne qu’une meilleure réflexion sur les concepts de partie et du tout, sur la nature des passions et sur le concept de détermination sera essentielle à ce développement. Dans la deuxième partie de la thèse, on considère trois milieux de référence pour situer la pensée spinozienne par rapport aux enjeux de la nouvelle philosophie de la nature de la seconde moitié du XVIIe siècle. D’abord, on reconsidère le statut de la seconde partie des Principes de la philosophie de Descartes et on montre l’infidélité de Spinoza à Descartes sur plusieurs points. Il s’agit d’une infidélité systématique qui témoigne de l’effort spinozien pour donner une cohérence à l’usage du concept cartésien le plus ambigu, celui de détermination. Ensuite, on montre que tout en essayant de poursuivre dans cette ligne, Spinoza peut avoir trouvé chez Hobbes des instruments intellectuels importants. Il s’agit surtout de l’usage que Hobbes fait du concept de mouvement comme véritable essence de tout phénomène physique, dont résulte sa conception du conatus. Cependant, on démontre aussi le désaccord entre la conception hobbesienne de la causalité et la position définitive de Spinoza. A ce propos, on propose de reconsidérer la pensée de Robert Boyle comme l’autre source décisive qui permet à Spinoza de développer sa réflexion physique plutôt du coté de l’activité des corps. Ce faisant, on souligne – en troisième lieu – que Spinoza va s’opposer au développement majeur du cartésianisme de ces années, c’est-à-dire l’occasionalisme, surtout dans la forme que lui avait donnait Arnold Geulincx. / My dissertation examins Spinoza’s account of bodies. I devote the first part of my dissertation to investigating how and why issues linked to the concept of body and, more generally, to physics, become real problems for Spinoza. This leads to the important result of reevaluating the first steps of Spinoza’s philosophical career. I stress the theological context in which, in the Short Treatise (1661 c.a.), the concept of body appeared for the first time as a challenge. How is it possible to demonstrate that the extension is an attribute of God and thus that finite bodies are modifications of God’s infinite substance? In order to answer this question, Spinoza will be forced to work out different further conceptual tools, most notably the mereological part/whole distinction, the status of natural law and the conatus doctrine. My chronological approach shows that the achievements we find in the Ethics (1675) are only the last and most consistent version of Spinoza’s philosophy, which underwrite several major changes through his development. This methodological approach allows us to appreciate several key shifts in Spinoza’s position and thus to frame in a more determinate way the problem of his sources. Firstly, I address the highly debated question of the dependence of Spinoza’s physics on Descartes’ own project. I focus on Spinoza’s attempt to make coherent Descartes’ use of the concept of determination, which turns to be crucial for Spinoza’s own account of physical interactions. As a second step, I explore Spinoza’s relationship with two key figures of the English Modern culture in the pre-Newtonian period: Thomas Hobbes and Robert Boyle. I stress Spinoza’s debt with Hobbes but also the discrepancies between their accounts of causal interactions. In that view, I underline that Robert Boyle provides an important framework to understand Spinoza’s ontology of activity. As a third and final step, I compare Spinoza’s own evolution with the rise of Occasionalism, which was at the same time a chronologically parallel, but philosophically opposite development of Descartes’ project.

Thesis (M.A.)--York University, 2006. Graduate Programme in Interdisciplinary Studies. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 159-167). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=4&did=1240690011&SrchMode=1&sid=7&Fmt=2&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1194986884&clientId=5220

Thesis (Doctoral)--King's College (University of London), 1998. / BLDSC reference no.: D218276. Includes bibliographical references.