narrative terms we often take for granted, she offers a clear refresher on just what we’re talking about when we talk about metaphor, plot, poem, or line, for instance. Her command of narrative theory is compelling and well-synthesized throughout the text. She is well and widely read, which makes the omission of current lyric theory all the more glaring. Lively debates in lyric theory—only consider recent work by Michael Cohen, Virginia Jackson, Cristanne Miller, Yopie Prins, and Shira Wolosky, to name a few—go unmentioned. Judging from her citations, Owens-Murphy only draws from a single camp in lyric theory, one whose practitioners—such as Mutlu Blasing, Jonathan Culler, and Northrop Frye—tend to treat lyric as an ahistorical, ever-present genre. As a result, Owens-Murphy perpetuates what Virginia Jackson famously calls “lyricization,” or the collapse of historically specific verse genres into the universal category of lyric. Indeed, it seems that lyric comes to stand in for any and all poetry, and the distinction between poetry and lyric is difficult to limn in this work. While her survey of twentieth-century literary fiction makes exciting contributions to these areas, Owens-Murphy does not achieve the same productive ends for students and scholars hoping to learn something about or see a new application of lyric theory.

中文翻译：

---

爱默生的回声：重新思考吐温、詹姆斯、沃顿和凯瑟的现实主义 作者：戴安娜·霍普·波莉

我们经常认为理所当然的叙事术语，例如，当我们谈论隐喻、情节、诗歌或台词时，她就我们所谈论的内容提供了清晰的复习。她对叙事理论的掌握令人信服，并且在整个文本中得到了很好的综合。她读得很好，阅读广泛，这使得当前抒情理论的遗漏更加明显。抒情理论中的激烈辩论——仅考虑迈克尔科恩、弗吉尼亚杰克逊、克里斯蒂安米勒、尤皮普林斯和希拉沃洛斯基最近的作品，仅举几例——未被提及。从她的引用来看，Owens-Murphy 只从抒情理论的一个阵营中汲取灵感，该阵营的实践者——如穆特鲁·布拉辛、乔纳森·卡勒和诺斯罗普·弗莱——倾向于将抒情视为一种非历史性的、永远存在的流派。结果，欧文斯-墨菲延续了弗吉尼亚杰克逊著名的“抒情，”或者历史上特定的诗歌体裁瓦解到抒情的普遍范畴。的确，抒情似乎代表了任何和所有的诗歌，在这部作品中很难区分诗歌和抒情的区别。虽然她对 20 世纪文学小说的调查对这些领域做出了令人兴奋的贡献，但欧文斯-墨菲并没有为希望了解抒情理论或看到抒情理论新应用的学生和学者取得同样的成果。