LEADER 04293nam 22007935 450 001 9910149580203321 005 20211005220530.0 010 $a0-8232-7266-4 010 $a0-8232-7268-0 024 7 $a10.1515/9780823272686 035 $a(CKB)3710000000934842 035 $a(DE-B1597)555105 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780823272686 035 $a(OCoLC)961105731 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC4747960 035 $a(EXLCZ)993710000000934842 100 $a20200723h20172017 fg 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur||||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aFutile Pleasures $eEarly Modern Literature and the Limits of Utility /$fCorey McEleney 210 1$aNew York, NY : $cFordham University Press, $d[2017] 210 4$dİ2017 215 $a1 online resource (256 p.) 327 $tFrontmatter -- $tContents -- $tFutilitarianism: An Introduction -- $t1. Pleasure without Profit -- $t2. Bonfire of the Vanities -- $t3. Art for Nothing?s Sake -- $t4. Spenser?s Unhappy Ends -- $t5. Beyond Sublimation -- $tCoda: Less Matter, More Art -- $tAcknowledgments -- $tNotes -- $tBibliography -- $tIndex 330 $aHonorable Mention, 2018 MLA Prize for a First BookAgainst the defensive backdrop of countless apologetic justifications for the value of literature and the humanities, Futile Pleasures reframes the current conversation by returning to the literary culture of early modern England, a culture whose defensive posture toward literature rivals and shapes our own.During the Renaissance, poets justified the value of their work on the basis of the notion that the purpose of poetry is to please and instruct, that it must be both delightful and useful. At the same time, many of these writers faced the possibility that the pleasures of literature may be in conflict with the demand to be useful and valuable. Analyzing the rhetoric of pleasure and the pleasure of rhetoric in texts by William Shakespeare, Roger Ascham, Thomas Nashe, Edmund Spenser, and John Milton, McEleney explores the ambivalence these writers display toward literature?s potential for useless, frivolous vanity. Tracing that ambivalence forward to the modern era, this book also shows how contemporary critics have recapitulated Renaissance humanist ideals about aesthetic value. Against a longstanding tradition that defensively advocates for the redemptive utility of literature, Futile Pleasures both theorizes and performs the queer pleasures of futility. Without ever losing sight of the costs of those pleasures, McEleney argues that playing with futility may be one way of moving beyond the impasses that modern humanists, like their early modern counterparts, have always faced. 606 $aEnglish literature$yEarly modern, 1500-1700$xHistory and criticism 606 $aLiterature and society$zEngland$xHistory$y16th century 606 $aLiterature and society$zEngland$xHistory$y17th century 606 $aPleasure in literature 606 $aSenses and sensation in literature 606 $aRenaissance Literature 606 $adeconstruction 606 $afutility 606 $apleasure 606 $aqueer theory 606 $aromance 606 $avanity 606 $aSOCIAL SCIENCE / Gender Studies$2bisacsh 610 $aRenaissance Literature. 610 $adeconstruction. 610 $afutility. 610 $apleasure. 610 $aqueer theory. 610 $aromance. 610 $avanity. 615 0$aEnglish literature$xHistory and criticism. 615 0$aLiterature and society$xHistory 615 0$aLiterature and society$xHistory 615 0$aPleasure in literature. 615 0$aSenses and sensation in literature. 615 4$aRenaissance Literature. 615 4$adeconstruction. 615 4$afutility. 615 4$apleasure. 615 4$aqueer theory. 615 4$aromance. 615 4$avanity. 615 7$aSOCIAL SCIENCE / Gender Studies. 676 $a820.9/003 700 $aMcEleney$b Corey, $4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0772254 801 0$bDE-B1597 801 1$bDE-B1597 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910149580203321 996 $aFutile pleasures$91576519 997 $aUNINA