![]() ![]() It concludes that Jameson fails to understand how this process works for dystopia as well as utopia, for barbarism as well as socialism. The paper argues that, for Nineteen Eighty-Four, as for any other science-fiction novel, the key question is that identified by Jameson: not 'did it get the future right?', but rather 'did it sufficiently shock its own present as to force a meditation on the impossible?'. Fredric Jameson is Distinguished Professor of Comparative Literature at Duke University. It takes issue with Jameson over two key issues: his overwhelming concentration on American science-fiction, which seems strangely parochial in such a distinguished comparativist and his understanding of Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four as an 'anti-Utopia' rather than a dystopia. It argues that Jameson's derivation of 'anti-anti-Utopianism' from Sartrean anti-anti-communism will provide 'the party of Utopia' with as good a slogan as it is likely to find in the foreseeable future. : Archaeologies of the Future: The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Fictions (9781844675388) by Jameson, Fredric and a great selection of. This paper begins with the proposition that Fredric Jameson's Archaeologies of the Future (2005) is the most important theoretical contribution to utopian and science-fiction studies since Darko Suvin's Metamorphoses of Science Fiction (1979). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |