Scan barcode
trekbicycles's review against another edition
3.0
Lots of examples bogged down some of the lucid, compelling claims... but that *does* serve its ANT-ish goals. I think that this is a great book -- just maybe for a lit major or someone who has read more of the "canon." My favorite moments were ones that suggested the academic discipline of literature can be made more democratic and less judgemental by taking students "where they are."
big_lu's review against another edition
4.0
read for uni
Very tasty. Enjoyed thoroughly. Feeling very attached to this book.
Very tasty. Enjoyed thoroughly. Feeling very attached to this book.
rociog's review against another edition
5.0
Felski writes with lucidity and charm on an issue that has long interested me: the gaping divide between the way lay readers react to art and the way academics do. The latter are all-too-ready to disdain the 'naive' reading (or viewing, listening) practices of the former. Everyday readers on the other hand, not unfairly complain that the stress placed by scholarson methods of interpretation stifles the artwork under the weight of academic apparatus.
Felski presents an invigourating alternative for bridging this divide, centred on the notion of attachment. She energetically argues agains the notion of feeling as a 'precipitous derailing of thought' (126) and champions a sort of reading built on ANT (Actor-Network-Theory) that accounts for the ways artworks act upon people and effect meaning.
Felski presents an invigourating alternative for bridging this divide, centred on the notion of attachment. She energetically argues agains the notion of feeling as a 'precipitous derailing of thought' (126) and champions a sort of reading built on ANT (Actor-Network-Theory) that accounts for the ways artworks act upon people and effect meaning.
leo_bean's review against another edition
2.0
This was so annoying. I would have dnf'd it if I wasn't reading it for a discussion group. My annoyance is more than just disagreement with Felski's ideas. Her method of adding example to example, throwing impressions about academia, teaching, the human psyche etc around like truths; the endless repetitions that don't lead anywhere; her claim to making use of ANT but actually doing nothing more than speaking of basic connections; the frequent contradictions to her own argument; and lastly the constant implications that whatever she is proposing is the solution to every problem in academia while never considering that nothing she identifies is universal and not everything is actually a problem. For instance, the dichotomies she presents are mostly artificial.
The scholar and university teacher in me wishes I could be more objective about this, but perhaps Felski would be delighted seeing my attachment, even in the form of distaste in a non-academic forum.
The scholar and university teacher in me wishes I could be more objective about this, but perhaps Felski would be delighted seeing my attachment, even in the form of distaste in a non-academic forum.
More...