In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Notes Introduction. The Epistemology of Optics: Seeing Subjects, Modern Minds 1. Gustave Flaubert, Bouvard et Pecuchet (Paris: Garnier-Flammarion, 1966), 245. (All translations of French citations, from primary and secondary texts, are by MargaretJean Flynn, with occasional changes by the author.) 2. Cited in an optical treatise published the same year as Bouvard et Pecuchet Felix Giraud-Teulon, La Vision et ses anomalies (Paris: J.-B. Bailliere et Fils, 1881), 250. 3. With its parodic encyclopedism, Bouvard et Pecuchet (which Flaubert wrote to expose the "L'immense betise moderne [qui] me donne la rage" [the modern world's vast stupidity (that) infuriates me] has been read as a novel of epistemological crisis, as postmodern avant la lettre. Such readings turn especially to self-referential passages like the absurdist biography of the duc d'Angouleme, emphasizing linguistic indeterminability, fragmentation, and discontinuity. See, for example, Fran~oise Gaillard, "Une inerrable histoire," in Pierre Cogny et aI., Flaubert et le comble de l'art: Nouvelles recherches sur Bouvard et Pecuchet: actes du colloque tenu au College de France les 22 et 23 mars 1980 (Paris: Societe d'Edition d'Enseignement Superieur, 1981). 4. Representative contributions to this emerging "history ofvision" include the following: Hal Foster, ed., Vision and Visuality (Seattle: Bay Press, 1988); David Michael Levin, Modernity and the Hegemony ofVision (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993); Stephen Melville and Bill Readings, eds., Vision and Textuality (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1995); and Teresa Brennan and Martin Jay, eds., Vision in Context: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Sight (New York: Routledge, 1996). 5. In Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), W. J. T. Mitchell describes a "pictorial turn" in intellectual and academic discourse, whose visual paradigms may supplant the textual paradigms that characterized the "linguistic turn" of theoretical studies after structuralism. He defines this "pictorial turn" as "a postlinguistic, postsemiotic rediscovery of the picture as a complex interplay between visuality, apparatus, institutions, discourse, bodies, and figurality" (16). 6. Jonathan Crary, Suspensions ofPerception: Attention, Spectacle, and Modern Culture (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2000), 3. 7. See Corbin's olfactory history of France, Le Miasme et la jonquille: ['odorat et l'imaginaire social XVIII-XIX siecles (Paris: Aubier Montaigne, 1982). 228 Notes to Pages 3-6 8. See, for example, theJournal ofVisual Culture. Other recent additions to the field include Nicholas Mirzoeff, ed., The Visual Culture Reader (London: Routledge, 1998); Nicholas Mirzoeff, An Introduction to Visual Culture (London: Routledge, 1999); Marita Sturken and Lisa Cartwright, Practices ofLooking: An Introduction to Visual Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001). 9. Jonathan Crary, Techniques ofthe Observer: On Vision and Modernity in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1990),3; Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison, "The Image of Objectivity," Representations 40 (Fall 1992): 81. In a later piece, Galison argues that the term objectivity is "deeply, ineradicably, a nineteenthcentury category" and identifies a shift "after about 1830" toward philosophy as a self-denying objectivity. 'Judgment Against Objectivity," in Picturing Science, Producing Art, ed. Caroline A. Jones and Peter Galison (New York: Routledge, 1998), 327-28. 10. Picturing Science, Introduction, 17-18. 11. Some touchpoints: in all his work, Michel Serres importantly emphasizes the mutual imbrication of myth, science, and literature. See Hermes: Literature, Science, Philosophy, ed.Josue Harari and David F. Bell (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982). George Levine's edited volume One Culture: Essays in Science and Literature (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987) contests Charles Percy Snow's classical distinction between the "Two Cultures" ofscience and literature as strictly divergent. See also George Levine, ed., Realism and Representation : Essays on the Problem ofRealism in Relation to Science, Literature, and Culture (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993). In his study of chance and causality in modern French fiction, David F. Bell warns against the reductionism of taking science to "influence" literature, with the latter understood as merely borrowing or reflecting knowledge from the former's stabler domain. Circumstances : Chance in the Literary Text (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1993). More recently, Allan Thiher proposes that not only did literature share in science 's epistemic quest, but that in the nineteenth century particularly, novelists believed they could rival science in the pursuit and proposal of knowledge. Thiher, Fiction Rivals Science: The French Novel from Balzac to Proust (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2001). 12. See especially Michel Foucault, Les Mots et les choses: une archeologie des sciences humaines (Paris: Gallimard, 1966) andJacques Derrida, Memoires d'aveugle: l'autoportrait...


Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.