the latter being a ready-made commentary. He is not afraid of being accused of instrumentalising the reasoning of the literary scholar. However, as one has to admit, his own voice is not a particularly revolutionary one. It boils down to rather staple diagnoses: the exhaustion of past worlds, untranslatability of ‘foreign’ forms of modernity, and, finally, new threats stemming from the neo-liberal politics. The most serious deficiency of this otherwise valuable book is the insufficiently exhibited methodological background. While Czapliński incorporates other voices into his own critical apparatus, ‘the suppliers’ of particular theoretical tools, freely used in the entirety of Poruszona mapa, are sadly left unmentioned. While remaining a comprehensive tale about the ‘affective map of Europe’, discussing such phenomena as ‘affective colonisation’, ‘social emotions’, ‘complicity in affects’, ‘shift of affects’, ‘diversified affective strategies’, and so on, the book neither acknowledges the names of any affect theorists nor clarifies any of the terms coming from the (quite abundant, after all) lexicon of the affect methodology. In Czapliński’s critical narrative a commentary on the affects changing the face of Europe remains the mere byplay, which is a pity, since it certainly poses another research challenge — one that has to be confronted in order to truly ponder and debate over the shape and future of the community.

中文翻译：

---

形式与不稳定：东欧、文学、后帝国差异

后者是现成的评论。他不怕被指责为文学学者的推理工具化。然而，不得不承认，他自己的声音并不是特别具有革命性的声音。它归结为相当重要的诊断：过去世界的枯竭，现代性“外国”形式的不可翻译性，以及新自由主义政治带来的新威胁。这本有价值的书最严重的缺陷是没有充分展示方法论背景。虽然 Czapliński 将其他声音纳入了他自己的批判工具，但遗憾的是，在 Poruszona mapa 中免费使用的特定理论工具的“供应商”却没有被提及。在保留关于“欧洲情感地图”的综合故事的同时，讨论诸如“情感殖民化”之类的现象，“社会情感”、“情感的共谋”、“情感的转变”、“多样化的情感策略”等等，这本书既不承认任何情感理论家的名字，也不澄清来自（相当丰富的，毕竟）情感方法的词典。在 Czapliński 的批判性叙述中，对改变欧洲面貌的影响的评论仍然只是一个玩笑，这很遗憾，因为它确实提出了另一个研究挑战——必须面对一个挑战，以便真正思考和辩论欧洲的形态和未来社区的。毕竟）情感方法的词典。在 Czapliński 的批判性叙述中，对改变欧洲面貌的影响的评论仍然只是一个玩笑，这很遗憾，因为它确实提出了另一个研究挑战——必须面对一个挑战，以便真正思考和辩论欧洲的形态和未来社区的。毕竟）情感方法的词典。在 Czapliński 的批判性叙述中，对改变欧洲面貌的影响的评论仍然只是一个玩笑，这很遗憾，因为它确实提出了另一个研究挑战——必须面对一个挑战，以便真正思考和辩论欧洲的形态和未来社区的。