000 03866nam a22005535i 4500
001 205072
003 IT-RoAPU
005 20221214233508.0
006 m|||||o||d||||||||
007 cr || ||||||||
008 210830t19921992nju fo d z eng d
020 _a9780691069265
_qprint
020 _a9781400820665
_qPDF
024 7 _a10.1515/9781400820665
_2doi
035 _a(DE-B1597)9781400820665
035 _a(DE-B1597)446054
035 _a(OCoLC)979748951
040 _aDE-B1597
_beng
_cDE-B1597
_erda
050 4 _aPN751.I94 1992
072 7 _aLIT004120
_2bisacsh
082 0 4 _a809.033
_a809/.93384
084 _aonline - DeGruyter
100 1 _aIzenberg, Gerald N.
_eautore
245 1 0 _aImpossible Individuality :
_bRomanticism, Revolution, and the Origins of Modern Selfhood, 1787-1802 /
_cGerald N. Izenberg.
250 _aCourse Book
264 1 _aPrinceton, NJ :
_bPrinceton University Press,
_c[1992]
264 4 _c©1992
300 _a1 online resource (372 p.)
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
505 0 0 _tFrontmatter --
_tCONTENTS --
_tACKNOWLEDGMENTS --
_tIntroduction --
_tONE. Two Concepts of Individuality --
_tTWO. Friedrich Schlegel --
_tTHREE. William Wordsworth --
_tFOUR. François-René de Chateaubriand --
_tConclusion --
_tNOTES --
_tBIBLIOGRAPHY --
_tINDEX
506 0 _arestricted access
_uhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec
_fonline access with authorization
_2star
520 _aStudying major writers and philosophers--Schlegel and Schleiermacher in Germany, Wordsworth in England, and Chateaubriand in France--Gerald Izenberg shows how a combination of political, social, and psychological developments resulted in the modern concept of selfhood. More than a study of one national culture influencing another, this work goes to the heart of kindred intellectual processes in three European countries. Izenberg makes two persuasive and related arguments. The first is that the Romantics developed a new idea of the self as characterized by fundamentally opposing impulses: a drive to assert the authority of the self and expand that authority to absorb the universe, and the contradictory impulse to surrender to a greater idealized entity as the condition of the self's infinity. The second argument seeks to explain these paradoxes historically, showing how romantic individuality emerged as a compromise. Izenberg demonstrates how the Romantics retreated, in part, from a preliminary, radically activist ideal of autonomy they had worked out under the impact of the French Revolution. They had begun by seeing the individual self as the sole source of meaning and authority, but the convergence of crises in their personal lives with the crises of the revolution revealed this ideal as dangerously aggressive and self-aggrandizing. In reaction, the Romantics shifted their absolute claims for the self to the realm of creativity and imagination, and made such claims less dangerous by attributing totality to nature, art, lover, or state, which in return gave that totality back to the self.
530 _aIssued also in print.
538 _aMode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
546 _aIn English.
588 0 _aDescription based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 30. Aug 2021)
650 0 _aLiterature and revolutions.
650 0 _aRomanticism.
650 0 _aSelf in literature.
650 7 _aLITERARY CRITICISM / European / English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh.
_2bisacsh
850 _aIT-RoAPU
856 4 0 _uhttps://doi.org/10.1515/9781400820665
856 4 0 _uhttps://www.degruyter.com/isbn/9781400820665
856 4 2 _3Cover
_uhttps://www.degruyter.com/cover/covers/9781400820665.jpg
942 _cEB
999 _c205072
_d205072