Rita Felski and Caroline Levine are critics driven by irritation of varying degrees. Felski is irritated that the hermeneutics of suspicion, “a style of interpretation driven by a spirit of disenchantment,” has dominated the critical enterprise for about 40 years (2, 3). Levine is irritated by the limitations of “politically minded ‘new formalisms’” of today’s literary studies (12). She sees emancipatory possibilities in their patterns and collisions. Winfried Fluck points out in his perceptive engagement with both of them that these critics are frustrated by power-minded critical regimes that have suppressed the possibilities of literature that may be released, in Levine’s words, “when forms meet” (8). Felski argues that the historical, contextual turn in literary criticism, once liberating, has become constraining, determinative, and even destructive. Now, she says, it’s time for something new—so let us go back to the literature with what we’ve learned from a long generation of historical reading, including (but not limited to) the fact that we’re contingent subjects reading contingent books. For Felski, this insight is afforded by the generation of theory that preceded it. The idea of “affording” is central to Levine’s argument that if we look at what forms are doing, we may perform

中文翻译：

---

“我们要离开这个地方”：学术工作场所的文学批评

Rita Felski 和 Caroline Levine 是受到不同程度刺激的批评家。Felski 对怀疑的解释学，“一种由祛魅精神驱动的解释风格”已经主导了批判事业大约 40 年感到恼火 (2, 3)。Levine 对当今文学研究中“具有政治意识的‘新形式主义’”的局限性感到恼火 (12)。她在他们的模式和碰撞中看到了解放的可能性。温弗里德弗拉克在他与他们两人的敏锐接触中指出，这些批评家对强权的批评制度感到沮丧，这些制度压制了文学的可能性，用莱文的话来说，“当形式相遇时”（8）。费尔斯基认为，文学批评的历史、语境转向一旦解放，就变成了限制性的、决定性的、甚至是破坏性的。现在，她说，是时候来点新的东西了——所以让我们用我们从一代人的历史阅读中学到的东西回到文学，包括（但不限于）我们是偶然的主体阅读偶然的事实图书。对于 Felski 来说，这种洞察力是由之前的理论产生提供的。“负担得起”的概念是莱文的论点的核心，即如果我们看看形式正在做什么，我们可能会执行