Standaard Boekhandel gebruikt cookies en gelijkaardige technologieën om de website goed te laten werken en je een betere surfervaring te bezorgen.
Hieronder kan je kiezen welke cookies je wilt inschakelen:
Technische en functionele cookies
Deze cookies zijn essentieel om de website goed te laten functioneren, en laten je toe om bijvoorbeeld in te loggen. Je kan deze cookies niet uitschakelen.
Analytische cookies
Deze cookies verzamelen anonieme informatie over het gebruik van onze website. Op die manier kunnen we de website beter afstemmen op de behoeften van de gebruikers.
Marketingcookies
Deze cookies delen je gedrag op onze website met externe partijen, zodat je op externe platformen relevantere advertenties van Standaard Boekhandel te zien krijgt.
Je kan maximaal 250 producten tegelijk aan je winkelmandje toevoegen. Verwijdere enkele producten uit je winkelmandje, of splits je bestelling op in meerdere bestellingen.
According to Oscar Wilde, the primary aim of the critic is to see the object as in itself it really is not'. Through a series of close and often unusual readings, this book endeavours to develop Wilde's remark into a detailed and creative theory of reading. Or perhaps that should be misreading: for, as this experimental work of criticism negotiates its way among the works of a number of late-nineteenth-century writers, particularly Robert Louis Stevenson and Wilde himself, Tearle uncovers some of the ways in which we as readers are prone to hallucinations while reading about, of all things, the experience of hallucination. Focusing in detail on a series of neologisms from writing of the period, such as 'handconscience', 'figmentary', and 'aftersense', and moving between a number of disciplines including literature, criticism, science, psychoanalysis, and even linguistics, Bewilderments of Vision endeavours to answer a number of questions, ranging from the urgent to the downright bizarre: What is the link between hallucination and social conscience in writing of the late-nineteenth century? Is there such a thing as textual hallucination? Why does the author of this book see a 'snake' that is not there when he 'reads' Jekyll and Hyde?