more extensive and unaffected pleasure

[lotesse]

Why, when discussing eighteenth-nineteenth(twentieth-)century anti-novel rhetoric, does no one address the discursive parallels with injunctions against onanism/masturbation? (and does anyone know of a book that does? because I would totally read that book.)

Comments

[ineptshieldmaid]

... That's Sedgwick? I have a copy hanging around on my computer, but the file name doesn't have author attribution in it and I'd been thinking it was some weird bit of fan studies or something.

MUST READ. AT ONCE.

[ithiliana]

Ha ha! It is! AHAHAHAHAH!

Well, sort of. I certainly think of her as a fangirl.

*ducks*

[ithiliana]

And I lose for not using this icon above...

[ineptshieldmaid]

Well, yes, but better Sedgwick than Catherine Driscoll!

[ithiliana]

Hadn't heard of Driscoll before now, although my general rule is "better Sedgwick than just about 99% of everybody else, WOOTZ*. Why yes, I tend toward fangirlishness my own self!

[ineptshieldmaid]

Driscoll is... not too bad, really. I just have METHODOLOGY ISSUES. I prefer my acafen to be literary scholars or historians, and I have ISSUES with cultural theory. Driscoll's article 'The pornography of romance and the romance of pornography' is rooly rooly interesting but she *doesn't cite things*. She keeps telling me things I know - like, say, fanfiction crosses the genre boundaries of romance and pornography - but NOT GIVING ME CITATIONS. I know it's true, but I still want to see her working!

[ithiliana]

p.s. OMG, great icon!!!!!!

[ineptshieldmaid]

:D thank you!