Cultural Intermediation and the Civil Sphere. A Cultural Sociology of Literary Production

文化中介和公民领域。

• 批准号: 514187809
• 负责人: Dr. Marcel Knöchelmann
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Department of Sociology
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: WBP Fellowship
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/514187809?language=en
• 关键词: Cultural; Intermediation; Civil; Sphere.; Sociology

Literature has a critical function for democratic society. In times of civil unrest—during movements such as Black Lives Matter or #metoo—the culture structure of the civil sphere is both drawn on and under invasive constraint. Authors provide narratives so that others are given the hermeneutic devices for understanding, empathy, or developing solidarity. They contribute to civil repair; but they require readership for so doing. Readership is crucially dependent on cultural intermediaries; they enable readership. Cultural intermediaries are those actors in between authors and potential readers: agents, editors, critics, or members of jury boards of literary prizes. They co-produce literature, making it materially manifest and publicly visible. Particularly in times of civil unrest, these actors have to position themselves towards the civil sphere: do they pitch, publish, or review the critical novel or do they neglect doing so in favour of less critical, potentially commercially more promising work? This moral factor in the decision-making of cultural intermediaries is not well understood. I propose to investigate this by employing Jeffrey Alexander’s civil sphere theory and empirically studying cultural intermediation in the US publishing industry, using a series of qualitative interviews. This will elucidate the moral factor of cultural intermediation. Public discourses of civil repair both question and foster civil solidarity; in the US, they are signified by deepening chasms, which makes this study particularly pertinent. If we subscribe to literature playing a vital role for democratic society, we need to better understand the reasonings and justifications of its production—particularly those in the shadows of commercial interests and power.

文学对民主社会具有批判功能。在民间动乱时期，在诸如“黑人的命也是命”或“#metoo”之类的运动中，民间领域的文化结构既受到借鉴，又受到侵入性的约束。作者提供叙述，以便其他人获得理解、同理心或发展团结的解释方法。它们有助于民用维修;但它们需要读者这样做。读者群在很大程度上依赖于文化中介;它们使读者群得以存在。文化中介是介于作者和潜在读者之间的行为者：代理人、编辑、评论家或文学奖评委会成员。他们共同创作文学作品，使其在物质上表现出来，并公开可见。特别是在内乱时期，这些行为者必须将自己定位于民间领域：他们是推销、出版或评论批评小说，还是忽视这一点，转而青睐批评性较低、商业上可能更有前途的作品？文化中介机构决策中的这一道德因素还没有得到很好的理解。我建议调查这一点，采用杰弗里亚历山大的公民领域理论和实证研究在美国出版业的文化中介，使用一系列的定性访谈。这将阐明文化中介的道德因素。民间修复的公共话语既质疑又促进民间团结;在美国，它们的标志是加深鸿沟，这使得这项研究特别相关。如果我们认同文学对民主社会的重要作用，我们就需要更好地理解其产生的理由和正当性尤其是那些在商业利益和权力阴影下产生的。