Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros62Comptes rendusMao Douglas, ed. The New Modernis...

Comptes rendus

Mao Douglas, ed. The New Modernist Studies

Cambridge University Press, 2021
Dominika Buchowska
Référence(s) :

Mao, Douglas, ed. The New Modernist Studies, Cambridge University Press, 2021

Texte intégral

1This new book The New Modernist Studies from Cambridge University Press (2021) clearly holds a strong promise for modernist studies and is a much-needed publication. Edited by Douglas Mao, this collection of essays brings new approaches to studies of modernism, illuminating those goals of the movement which had previously remained largely obscure and untouched. Bringing together an impressive number of established scholars of modernism it contributes to making modernist studies global, transnational, and interdisciplinary—which although aimed at from the start was never truly achieved. In his Introduction Mao identifies the inspiration behind his book which is the rise of interest in ‘the new modernist studies’ (1) in academia in the very last decades of the twentieth century. This second wave of modernist studies followed the initial enthusiasm for the arts and literature of the early twentieth century that took place in the 1950s which was more focused on attempts to understand these radical developments. The origins of the latter wave of modernist studies, which the book traces, is associated with cultural and intellectual conditions of the 1990s, as well as with institutional assessments and recollections of scholars and researchers working in the field. The volume’s cross-temporal approach encompassing a look at the past alongside future perspectives and speculations makes it an outstanding publication of great value to anyone interested in modernist studies.

2As Mao emphasises, there was an enthusiasm by modernist scholars of the late 20th century to study modernism ‘differently’ to their predecessors, by incorporating the achievements, methodology and approaches borrowed from other studies, in particular that of cultural studies which is then claimed to have become a ‘subdomain’ of modernist studies (3). In this way the new modernist studies introduces new approaches as well as expands the range of works it studies. Highlighting ‘cross-field interchange’ (4), some of the chapters show how modernist studies can interrelate with other fields, such as e.g. religious studies and disability studies, sound studies and affect theory, ecomaterialism, race studies, and Black studies. Methodologies used in these other fields of inquiry are anticipated to shed new light on modernism. Although most contributors to this volume are literary scholars, they nonetheless aspire to interdisciplinarity following the ‘global turn’ which includes, for example, incorporating more female authors, non-white artists, political and ecological involvement, or basing one’s research on digital databases. The opponents of new modernist studies criticise it for being either too narrow or too flexible. The former emphasise the field’s failure to become interdisciplinary, the domination of the West in terms of scholars and objects of study, the field’s inability to connect with cultural studies, and its unwavering adherence to the literary canon, which remains white and male. The latter stress new modernist studies’ lack of coherence, pointing to their embracing almost everything and the limitless use of the term modernism. The book successfully tries to face these challenges by incorporating interdisciplinary studies, providing analyses of non-canonical works by women and minority artists.

3Yet, as Mao highlights, it has been beneficial to the scholars of new modernist studies that the term has remained non-specific and adaptable. New modernist studies (NMS) has also embraced the changing meaning of the term modernism which is gradually expanding not only temporally but also in a spatial and formal sense, advocating the use of global modernisms and following Susan Friedman’s phrase ‘planetary modernisms’ (7). Mao cites as examples of this, Mike Gold’s novel Jews without Money (1930) and Jean Renoir’s film Toni (1935), which are essentially anti-modernist but can be reclaimed by modernism, and asks the intriguing question: can anti-modernism be modernist? Such an approach broadens modernism, even if it runs the risk of making it seem too diverse. For instance, science fiction novels that have traditionally been dismissed by modernist scholars because of their scope are now reappraised in this context. Finally, Mao comes up with a controversial perspective for the future of NMS which should cultivate its ‘public outreach’ by shifting away from academia, inviting non-academics to promote modernism and leading to ‘deprofessionalization’ (16). This would follow the path of the modernists themselves, emphasising as it does the ‘anti-academicism of modernism’ and ‘a welcome return to the oppositionality modernism cultivated’ (16). The book is divided into two parts: the first one, comprising only two chapters offers a historical and institutional account of the NMS, while the second one provides a collection of essays that offer a fresh approach to the study of modernism, its canonical texts and radically non-mainstream modernist works.

4Within the essays’ methodology the concept of ‘weak theory’ by Saint-Amour tends to dominate with its emphasis on the spatial expansion of modernist studies, anti-academicism, the rejection of a rigid set of definitions that would threaten to ‘freeze the canon’ (57), weakness not being ‘a failure’ (108) but a possibility, etc.

5Michael North’s chapter addresses the challenge of tracing the history of NMS, focusing on the traditional idea of what modernism is, i.e. on the version of modernism against which post-modernism was built. He discusses the factors which have conditioned modernist studies such as a decline of the importance of theory accompanied by a rise in contextual background, modernism’s perceived detachment from everyday life, all of which contributed to the diminishing popularity of modernism. This was a modernism associated with artistic autonomy and exclusiveness, dictated by ‘the necessary isolation and estrangement’ (27) of the Romantics. Explaining why modernism tended to be (negatively) perceived as anti-realist, North points to the basis of its antagonism to mass culture which post-modernism embraced enthusiastically, and to the links of modernism with New Criticism which underscored the independence of an artwork from external sources. The development of post-structuralism and deconstruction kept modernism distant from any associations with the external world and any ‘mimetic ambitions’ (29), highlighting its abstraction and leading to the belated arrival of what North refers to as the ‘explicitly modernist cultural studies’ that emerged in the late 1990s (36). More importantly, North clarifies the historical emergence of post-modernism, which rather than being considered as supplanting modernism came to be seen as its continuation, while the subsequent decline of post-modernism spurred the advent of the NMS.

6Arguing that ‘movements become recognizable as such through multiple forms of institutional recognition’ (41), Mark Wollaeger’s chapter ‘Scholarships’ Turn: Origins and Effects of the New Modernist Studies’ traces the emergence of the NMS to the mid- and late 1990s when the journal Modernism/Modernity was first published followed by the first conference of the newly established Modernist Studies Association (MSA) in 1999 at Pennsylvania State University. These beginnings displayed some major concerns that tend to resurface within NMS today, namely their interdisciplinary and international character, with literature remaining the dominating field of study and MSA conferences being attended mainly by scholars from North America . Wollaeger is refreshingly honest in his criticism of the domination of North American scholars at MSA conferences and deplores the persistence of ‘disciplinary silos’ that have insisted on the conferences being ‘a largely literary affair’ (45). In a similar way MSA has been mostly the bastion of white academics, clearly revealing a problem with racial diversity. This shows, as Wollaeger reports that while NMS are keen to undertake research on e.g. Black modernisms, networking with colleagues of color remains mostly theoretical. Interestingly, there has been no failure on the women front, as Wollaeger notes, there is a strong presence of women in the organisational and scholarly structures of the MSA, yet the women forming the topic of research are minimal leaving patriarchy to lead the way. The essay admits that much needs to be done to enhance the multidisciplinary character of NMS, and embrace visual arts, music, etc. As Wollaeger rightly notes, this ‘cross-media comparative study’ (52) approach that is missing in the American modernist studies can be found in the European Network for Avant-Garde and Modernism Studies (EAM.

7In the chapter opening the second part of the book, ‘Planetarity Edges: Modernist Studies and the Bounds of Modernism’, María del Pilar Blanco draws on versions of global theory from a number of fields to assess modernist studies’ ‘planetary turn’. She analyses the issue of planetarity, tracing Spivak, Dimock and Buell’s theories, to see how challenging such a planetary turn might be for Anglo-American humanities. Blanco notices the difficulties in accomplishing planetary readings because of ‘our disciplinary realities, ensconced as they are within set period, linguistic, and cultural boundaries’ (69). Discussing Enrique Dussel’s understanding of planetarity and Eurocentrism, which conditions the development of modernity through Europe’s sense of centrality, she singles out Dussel’s call to surpass globalisation’s universalising discourse by undermining Eurocentrism and instead propagating diversity.

8Further discourse surrounds the question of planetarity as a method to approach literature. This presents a continuation of the arguments of Chilean author Alejandro Zambra, who discusses the impossibility to read literature from all parts of the world due to our linguistic limitations, positing the notion of an ‘indecipherable book’ symbolising ‘planetary thinking’s current status as a set of scholarly desire’ (73). Blanco then analyses aspects of planetarity, ‘cosmopolitan aspirations’ and ‘transatlantic correspondences’ (83) in Spanish-American modernism using the example of Rubén Dario and Gómez Carillo’s poetry, referring to their travels to Paris, their poetic translations, and encounters with French and European intelligentsia which reveal a failure of the Western Europeans to embrace, understand and acknowledge the vast heritage looming beyond South American modernismo.

9Susan Stanford Friedman’s chapter ‘Religion’s Configurations: Modernism, Empire, Comparison’ uses religion to analyse modernisms in order to shed new light on those aspects of the past that were previously left out or misinterpreted. Using the example of Amardeep Singh’s comparative approach, Friedman juxtaposes writers from different parts of the world and from different religious cultures in the context of early twentieth-century colonialism. Finding a very meaningful presence of religion in these works that is nearly absent in the contemporary West, she contrasts Rabindranath Tagore’s Gora (1909) and E. M. Forster’s A Passage to India (1924), Huda Shaarawi’s Harem Years (1986) and H. D.’s The Flowering of the Rod (1942-44) in the context of religious epiphanies. The works of these non-Western authors which have so far remained outside the modernist canon, enable one to re-examine key modernist works of the global West, and see how they empower the authors to construe new spiritualities and ideologies. By acknowledging the hindering role religion plays in cosmopolitanism and feminism, Tagore and Shaarawi seek a type of religion that is more liberal and tolerant of diversity. For Forster and H. D., estranged from the established religions of the West, the mystical and religious encounters they find in India and Egypt respectively provide moments of revelation. Religion provides Forster and H. D. with a ‘cosmopolitan and gender-crossing epiphany’ whereas for Tagore and Shaarawi it functions as a force stimulating ‘the politics of anti-colonialism and feminism’ (104).

10Taking a similarly comparative approach, Maren Linett forges an interesting and yet unexplored connection between modernist studies and disability studies, in her chapter ‘Disability’s Disruptions: Embodiment and the New Modernist Studies’. Following Saint-Amour’s weak theory, she sees disability not as a weakness but as a possibility and strength in Conrad’s canonical Heart of Darkness as well as in Elizabeth Bowen’s less studied works House in Paris and ‘Look at All Those Roses’. The protagonists’ disability is seen as empowerment through merging of the self with the other, as Linett argues, ‘these characters absorb disability’s otherness into the normal self’ (122). She maintains that they do not transcend their weakness to become strong but are strong while being weak (122). Disability in these works refers to both to the protagonists—Kurtz, Madame Fisher, and Josephine—and the others as they cast their weakness, madness, or illness over the nondisabled characters. In Heart of Darkness disability is cleverly linked to imperialism and racism, with madness becoming a ‘political category’ used to represent both the natives of the Congo and the invading Europeans (112).

11David James’ ‘Affect Vocabularies: Literature and Feeling after 1890, in light of the affect studies, analyses the seemingly neglected sphere of emotion in modernism, and the role of affect in the general weak theory of modernism. Looking at affect through weakness, loss, disappointment and failure, he explores the heterogeneous nature of emotional representation, pondering about the new ways of reading and writing that tend to be overlooked. Focusing on To the Lighthouse, James addresses the ways in which structures of narration help to convey affection through pathos, which is manifested within ‘Time Passes’, a section understood as a ‘structural break’ outbalanced by the ‘plaintive lyricism of the section’s style’, producing ‘its very own formal pathos’ (134). James performs a detailed analysis of the passage, studying rhythm, tempo, diction, clausal pace, parataxis, and sibilance, finding that all these ‘microelements of expression capture the forking structure of feeling that Woolf herself navigates’. Such affective descriptions are transformational rather than mimetic in conveying ‘emotional turbulence’. Moving on from interior depictions which are thought to facilitate the emotive capacities of literature, James discusses anti-interior approach in Wyndham Lewis’s Men without Art, Tarr, and ‘The Meaning of the Wild Body’. Depicting the external faculties of his characters, Lewis’s prose seems to remain emotionless, giving more energy to objects rather than humans, so that his mechanical bodies are ‘things, or physical bodies, behaving as persons’ (141). Lewis’s style and rhythm contribute to his promotion of ‘mechanical feelings’ (141).

12Sarah Cole’s essay ‘Invisibility’s Art. The Seen and the Unseen in Modernism and Modernist Studies’, draws parallels between H. G. Wells’ The Invisible Man (1897) and Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man (1947) as they are both centered around the notion of invisibility, evoking issues related to science and technology, race, social status and power. In Wells’ book, invisibility is understood literally as Griffin experiments with the idea of becoming unseen in order to launch political tyranny, while in Ellison’s work, invisibility is treated metaphorically to allude to social and racial invisibility stemming from white supremacy and empowerment. Yet what the two writers share is the idea of gaining power through invisibility, as they ‘recognize that invisibility is desired or granted only for purposes of violence and power, or [. . .] resistance and self-preservation in relation to violence and power’ (163). Cole treats the invisible as a generative concept, as she finds links between invisibility and modernity, invisibility and racial issues. One of the most interesting aspects of this chapter is the discussion of Saidiya Hartman’s book Wayward Lives, Beautiful Experiments concerned with the lives of black girls from early twentieth century New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia, their sexual exploitation, and issues of ‘excessive visibility’ and restoring these girls to life and to being visible in the way they were meant to be.

13The topic of race continues in Miriam Thaggert’s chapter ‘Black Writing’s Visuals: African American Modernism in Nugent, Ligon, and Rankine’, which explores the links between the art and literature of the New Negro Movement and more contemporary cultural production. Thaggert uses a less studied short story by Richard Bruce Nugent, ‘Smoke, Lilies, and Jade’, as it embraces ekphrastic representations of the New Negro era, and then turns to more contemporary figures, both in art and literature, to evoke questions about the subjectivity of the African American body and its associated meanings (e.g. violence). She analyses the work of Glenn Ligon, a contemporary visual artist working in the spirit of conceptualism, who creates stenciled, text-based paintings which, through intertextuality, relate to, among others, Zora Neale Hurston’s essay ‘How It Feels to Be Colored Me’ (1928). Thaggert refers to this practice as ‘the inverse of ekphrasis’ in which Ligon selectively locates words from literature and positions them on diverse surfaces contributing to the physicality of the text. Then, in a reversal of this process, as Thaggert shows, Claudia Rankine’s book Citizen: An American Lyric (2014), which focuses on everyday racial encounters referred to as ‘microaggressions’ (167), incorporates literary expression and visual art, including Ligon’s own text paintings. Thus, through visualisation and textualisation/narrativisation Afro-American modernist subjectivity reemerges in Ligon’s art and Rankine’s book. On the whole, Thaggert analyses in an illuminating way the process of transfer from textual to visual, and the changes that inevitably take place in such a transformation. For methodology she refers to critical work of both early twentieth-century and contemporary critics such as Cherene Sherrard-Johnson, Anne Carroll, and Mary Ann Calo, who explore the complexity of the relationship between word and image.

14Edwin Hill’s ‘Noir Film’s Soundtracks: Jazz, Black Transnationalism, and Postcolonial Genres of Criminality’shows how film noir and jazz influenced each other, elevating the status of both forms to highbrow standards of culture. By exploring the ground-breaking work of Miles Davis, Martial Solal, Louis Malle, Jean-Pierre Melville, and Christian Chevallier through film images, music, soundtracks, records, recordings, radio and television programs, Hill demonstrates how Western culture attempts to approach the Other, especially through African American culture. The essay focuses on listening to and listening in the noir film as well as the on listening strategies that enable one to engage with blackness, understood literally and figuratively. One of the most interesting aspects of this chapter is its rendering of ‘technopoetics’, meant hereto convey the involvement of Afro-American and African intellectuals, musicians and sound producers with technology (186) and to highlight the intersections between the image of the film and the sound of le noir. This chapter is particularly important, not only because it enriches the modernist gap in Black Studies but also addresses the seemingly overlooked area of sound theory, and as the author emphasises, noir film provides ‘multimedia intersections’ which need to be studied and explored in more depth. Aarthi Vadde’s chapter, ‘Language’s Hopes: Global Modernism and the Science of Delabelization’, examines the science and technology behind the formation of artificial languages – international auxiliary languages (IAL). These languages were invented to ‘promote mutual understanding in literal and instrumental terms’ as a reaction against the increasing fragmentation of knowledge across national languages, and to make publications more accessible to international audiences without linguistic barriers. Vadde argues convincingly that debates around IALs are central to the discourse on language in modernist literature promoting the issue of globalisation, even if at the expense of the local. Taking a globalist viewpoint consistent with the weak theory of modernism, the essay extends the boundaries of modernism even further, encompassing artificial languages such as e.g. Esperanto, Basic English, Interlingua, computer programming languages, cryptology, machine learning and machine translation in the context of modernist literature. Such a bold approach requires the scholars of modernist studies to ‘cease isolating the literary, ethnic, and national dimensions of language from the professional, technological, and communicative ones’. Vadde also shows how the interest of early-twentieth-century scholars in the mechanisation of language, inspired by the idea to overcome difficulties in international scientific communication and scholarly exchange, was inspirational to linguistic and literary confluences. Ezra Poundfound the idea of translating literature into artificial languages, in particular Basic English, interesting for its purifying and simplifying qualities; although he could not see himself writing creatively in such a language, he did appreciate its translational potential as it would prove the literary work’s intrinsic value – ‘as a magnificent system for measuring extant works. As a jolly old means of weeding out bluffs’ (209). Other writers, including Orwell and Joyce were also attracted by the experimental and utopian character of IAL.

15Utopianism is also examined by Steven S. Lee in his chapter ‘Revolution’s Demands: Modernism, Socialist Realism, and the Manifesto’, which traces the development of a revolutionary thought from socialist realism, through romanticism to modernism by means of the concept of a myth. Although revolution is a thing of the past in the West, where it has seemed distant and utopian, ‘stripped of ideological content’ (227) while its aesthetic forms have been fetishised and commodified (227), in China and Russia for example, it still remains a vital political and aesthetic force. By exploring the connections between revolution and aesthetics, the essay asks ‘how impotent the revolutions of the twentieth-century seem from the vantage of our post-post-Cold War present’ (227) yet are still ongoing elsewhere. The essay aims at highlighting the connection between modernism and communism, by embracing the manifesto’s scope which again applies both to art and revolution, and at finding affinities between the Communist Manifesto and avant-garde’s own manifestos. Lee treats Marx and Engels’ Communist Manifesto both as a literary genre and as a document proclaiming and promoting the existence of Communism by tracking the fate of the document in Stalinist Russia (the 1934 Soviet Writers’ Congress) and Maoist China (Mao Zedong’s 1942 Yan’an Conference on Literature and Art) in order to enhance our contemporary understanding of a revolution. In modern China the manifesto is seen as an ongoing revolutionary aesthetic that erases boundaries between the author and the audience, the narrator and the subject matter, modernism and socialist realism, treating all cultural production as a ‘still-unfolding genre’ (228). As Lee amply demonstrates, the manifesto in communist states ‘not only flourished but became lived experience’ (229). By treating a non-literary text in the context of NMS, as well as associating communism and socialist realism with the modernist movement, the essay challenges previously set boundaries of modernist studies often defined against realist practices.

16This takes us to feminist utopia in ‘Feminism’s Archives: Mina Loy, Anna Mendelssohn, and Taxonomy’ by Sara Crangle who, alluding to Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s 1915 feminist utopian novel, Herland, and Griselda Pollock’s virtual collections of the aging body and the nude, analyses Mina Loy’s ‘Feminist Manifesto’ (1914) and Anna Mendelssohn’s MAMA manifesto and her other poems. The chapter focuses on these authors’ engagement with silent, sinister acts of violence associated with the marginalisation of women, the regular, ritualised sacrifice of women’s undertakings, and female bodies that gradually become nonexistent and deprived of their essential form. Loy’s manifesto and Mendelssohn’s poetry undermine traditional patriarchal taxonomies rooted in archival foundations. Loy calls women to self-violation in terms of ‘the unconditional surgical destruction of virginity’ which she sees as the only way to liberate oneself from male domination, while Mendelssohn’s MAMA manifesto is a direct challenge to DADA and its alleged patriarchal allegiance. Loy’s Manifesto, as Crangle contends, is at times satirical if accusatory, while Mendelssohn’s is more boisterous, blaming men for women’s suffering, for the sacrifice of bringing up children while men remain mere ‘Dessert Daddies’. Her poem ‘Abschield’ challenges the traditional taxonomy of a mother, which evokes Derrida’s quest for neutral forms, while an appending part of the poem found in Mendelssohn’s archive provokes further debate on categorisation, racial taxonomy, and victimisation, involving Jews, Holocaust and the question of imperative memory. In this chapter the archive is not treated as a source for material but as a subject of research in itself.

17Gayle Rogers’ chapter, ‘Risk Instruments: Speculation, Futurity, and Modernist Finance’, is concerned with the economic aspect of modernism; it engages in a discussion of art and literature treated as commodity—a view that was avoided or shunned by the original modernists themselves, since modernism was often anti-consumerist, opposed mass consumer culture, and preferred to be autonomous and independent of market forces. Yet as Rogers shows, NMS are open to embrace this somewhat neglected sphere. This essay sees modernism through the lens of risk, futurity, and speculation which are especially important in a period marked by anxiety, uncertainty and seeming futility. He draws upon the risk society’s theories of Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens, who illustrate in their work how the perception of risk has changed across centuries. In modernism, with the advancement of technology, risk was associated with the very same opportunities and advantages that science and technological advancement brought along. Furthermore, Rogers traces the motif of speculation and speculative trends in aesthetic movements (i.e., Impressionism), modernist literature (The Great Gatsby), modernists’ private lives (James Joyce and Ulysses), collecting trends (Gertrude Stein), patronage, investment, exclusivity of artworks and investment. The essay also analyses George Schuyler’s Black No More (1931), an example of speculative fiction which depicts skin colour as an obstacle to financial success. Speculation is shown to acquire a greater degree of risk among ethnic minorities, which increases their vulnerability. Linking speculation with ethnic minorities reveals some interesting remarks about the ‘daring risks’ undertaken by ‘historically marginalized and oppressed groups’ (293); it refers to ‘the Afro-pessimist field of Black philosophy’ (293) in the context of futurity and prediction among the more disadvantaged groups with limited access to financial speculation, in whose case speculation means risk and the inevitability of failure.

18In his chapter ‘Deep Time’s Hauntings: Modernism and Alternative Chronology’, Paul K. Saint-Amour explores the concept of deep time in modernist literature, tracing its presence in Joyce, E. M. Forster, and Woolf. It embraces the concepts of ecocriticism and environmental humanities within modernist studies and in the present, showing the awareness of modernist authors about the looming threat of eco-catastrophe as they embrace ecomaterialism. Deep time refers to epochal time scales—geological, astronomical and cosmological—that humans are capable of measuring. In an illuminating way, Saint-Amour traces elements of ‘deep but still human time’ such as ‘prehistoric and premodern human communities’ in Woolf’s The Voyage Out. Similarly, Mrs Dalloway and Between the Acts reference mammoths that suddenly and unexpectedly emerge in modernity, asserting the importance of prehistoric times in the present, and making the present feel more intense and more profound. The objective of the essay is to show the interrelatedness of the two temporalities—the momentary and the epochal—in modernist literature given that ‘the epochal is perceptually a function of the momentary’ (300). Saint-Amour traces the legibility of the deep past in the landscape of Woolf’s novels’ interest in archaeology. One of the most interesting motifs of the essay is his discussion of the new use of aerial photography and the technological advances in archeological practice which have led to some remarkable archaeological discoveries in modernist times, thanks to the work of O. G. S. Crawford (Editor of Antiquity) and his development of Aerial Archaeology. These ancient or prehistoric sites (e.g. the ancient Roman town Venta Icenorum) are shown to reemerge in the present but have to be viewed from above at very specific times (at dawn, dusk, etc.) so as to take into consideration the impact of the sunlight and objects casting specific shadows and thus being visible, ‘an ancient site lost to view in whole or part could become legible through such whisker-thin openings in time. To see these effaced elements of the deep past one had to look at precisely the right moment’ (305), one had to be very time-aware. Deep time finds its way into the present as Saint-Amour concludes, ‘shapes made by the deep past [intersect] with the punctual catastrophe of the present . . . Deep time is legible through the aperture of the moment. The stylus of the moment writes in the ink of deep time’ (311).

19To conclude one has to highlight the book’s desire to expand the boundaries of modernist scholarship and look well beyond ‘classical modernism’, to tackle those yet unexplored aspects that not only connect it with other studies and disciplines but reveal modernist works’ multi-layered depths and meanings that still remain to be uncovered. Hopefully, the tendency among modernist scholars to examine these new concepts of modernism will generate interest from scholars of other humanities and inspire more such groundbreaking research. To this end, it is thrilling to see, as we flip the pages of The New Modernist Studies, how new contexts, connections, intertextualities and interferences emerge while re-reading well-known modernist texts, with a strong emphasis on cultural studies, race studies, disability studies or ecomaterialism, making modernism a very promising area of scholarship.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Dominika Buchowska, « Mao Douglas, ed. The New Modernist Studies »Études britanniques contemporaines [En ligne], 62 | 2022, mis en ligne le 12 avril 2022, consulté le 19 juillet 2024. URL : ; DOI :

Haut de page


Dominika Buchowska

Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur


Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search