Edited Volumes by Matthias Preuss
Im Umgang mit Gattungen zeigen sich Konventionalität und Rebellion, Opportunismus und Widerständi... more Im Umgang mit Gattungen zeigen sich Konventionalität und Rebellion, Opportunismus und Widerständigkeit, Normativität und Anarchie des Schreibens. Vor dem Hintergrund der Gattungsfrage versammelt dieser Band kultur- und literaturwissenschaftliche Annäherungen an Kleist. Gattung wird in den Beiträgen nicht allein literaturgeschichtlich verstanden, sondern als philosophische, anthropologische, biologische, ästhetische und politische Kategorie diskutiert. Dabei rücken Figuren der Transgression, Restitution und Inkorporation von Ordnungssystemen ins Zentrum der Aufmerksamkeit. Kleist verleiht der Gattungsfrage um 1800 ein neues Gewicht.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Texts, Animals, Environments: Zoopoetics and Ecopoetics, 2019
"Texts, Animals, Environments. Zoopoetics and Ecopoetics" probes the
multiple links between ecocr... more "Texts, Animals, Environments. Zoopoetics and Ecopoetics" probes the
multiple links between ecocriticism and animal studies, assessing the
relations between animals, environments and poetics. While ecocriticism usually relies on a relational approach to explore phenomena related to the environment or ecology more broadly, animal studies tends to examine individual or species-specific aspects. As a consequence, ecocriticism concentrates on ecopoetical, animal studies on zoopoetical elements and modes of representation in literature (and the arts more generally). Bringing key concepts of ecocriticism and animal studies into dialogue, the volume explores new ways of thinking about and reading texts, animals, and environments – not as separate entities but as part of the same collective.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Papers by Matthias Preuss
Tierstudien 13: Ökologie (ed. Jessica Ullrich), 2018
Dieser Beitrag untersucht aus medienökologischer, wissenshistorischer und wissenspoetologischer P... more Dieser Beitrag untersucht aus medienökologischer, wissenshistorischer und wissenspoetologischer Perspektive, wie Tiere bei der Darstellung ökologischen Wandels als Vermittler agieren. Es soll gezeigt werden, dass Tiere als Medien von Umweltveränderungen verstanden werden können. Diese These wird am Beispiel verschiedener Austernanen (Ostrea edulis, Crassostrea virginica) plausibilisiert. Mollusken kata lysieren im 19. Jahrhundert die Entdeckung des Arbeitsgegenstands der frühen Tierökologie, durch dessen Erforschung das Denken eines biozönotischen Gleichgewichts emergiert. Darüber hinaus provoziert die nationalökonomische Durchdringung des Meeres durch Aqua kultur eine Reflexion des Aussterbens als unvorhergesehene Folge nicht ,erhalcungsgemäßer' menschlicher Ein-und Zugriffe. Zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts werden Austern als Bioindikatoren für schwan kende Parameter von Habi"taten im Rahmen lokaler und globaler Veränderungen aufgefasst. In der Gegenüberstellung dieser Phasen zeichnet sich ein Funktionswandel ab. Die Medienkarriere der Austern vom Forschungsobjekt zum Forschungsinstrument wird durch ihren Körper und ihre Praktiken (das Filtrieren) mitbestimmt. Die Unter suchung dieser Transformation zielt einerseits darauf, die materiellen Voraussetzungen des Filtrierens als Darstellungsverfahren herauszu arbeiten; andererseits geht es allgemeiner darum, wie die Durchdrin gung (und nicht die Trennung) von Organismus und Milieu und damit die Auflösung dieser Opposition figuriert wird.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Journal for Literary Theory 09/02 (2015), S. 250–270.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Book Chapters by Matthias Preuss
Andrea Allerkamp, Matthias Preuss, Sebastian Schönbeck (Hg.): Unarten. Kleist und das Gesetz der Gattung, 2019
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Driscoll, Kári/Hoffmann, Eva (eds.): What Is Zoopoetics? Texts, Bodies, Entanglement. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan., 2018
Literary animal studies are concerned with the marginal, with critters that
populate the fringes... more Literary animal studies are concerned with the marginal, with critters that
populate the fringes. In pursuit of arachnids in literature and its theory,
this contribution examines three different zoopoetological figures in
Ovid’s Metamorphoses—the spinning spider, the weaving spider, and the
secreting spider. Each of these figures conveys a different way in which
animals contribute to poetry and, thus, supports Aaron Moe’s affirmation
that animals are indeed “makers” (Moe 2013, 2): They can provide
the content, the form, and the medium of literature. What is more,
each figure also implicates a different way to think about literature—as
expression, as text, and as secretion. These ways are paraphrased at the end
of each section in terms of the theoretical writings of Roland Barthes.
Departing from the understanding of figures as “material–semiotic nodes
or knots” (Haraway 2008, 4), in what follows, I will unfold the material
and semiotic aspects of each figure. To contextualize and historicize
the tropes, I will relate them to the ancient knowledge about spiders
as set out in the writings of Aristotle and Pliny the Elder. In my analysis,
I distinguish between three interrelated levels of animal materiality:
subject matter, textuality, and corporeality. Drawing on Nicole Shukin’s
(2009) rubric of rendering, as well as the works of Bruce Holsinger
(2009) and Sarah Kay (2011) on parchment, I flesh out the notion of
corporeality, which I propose as an antidote to a reductive semiotic
approach to animals in texts. Textual webs are to be taken seriously as
traces that do not necessarily indicate a former animal presence but that
consist of actual animal matter. This conception of literature as secretion
resists the tendency to consume animals in theory. Spiders are more
than mere metaphors, and they seldom come alone. When we begin to
pull at the threads of arachnopoetic imagery, marine snails emerge and
flayed goats come to the fore. The following analysis not only serves as a
reminder of the fundamental entanglement of different life-forms (both
nonhuman and human), but also points out the poetic machinations that
are involved in pursuing literary animal studies and the becoming (zoo)
poetic of literary theory.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conferences Organized by Matthias Preuss
Das Gegen\Dokumentarische ist eine Antwort auf die Provokation des Dokumentarischen. Die... more Das Gegen\Dokumentarische ist eine Antwort auf die Provokation des Dokumentarischen. Diese Provokation liegt im Anspruch oder Begehren, ›Wirklichkeit‹ zu erfassen, darzustellen und zu kontrollieren. Interventionen dagegen gibt es, seit es das Dokumentarische gibt. Für uns markiert der Begriff der Gegen\Dokumentation einen strategischen Einsatz, mit dem das Verständnis dokumentarischer Medien, Operationen, Institutionen, Poetiken, Ästhetiken, Schreib- und Darstellungsweisen geschärft und politisiert werden soll. Das Gegen\Dokumentarische umfasst Versuche, anders zu dokumentieren und Anderes zu dokumentieren. Das Gegen\Dokumentarische verweist auf eine andere Rahmung und auf das Andere des Dokumentarischen. Die Autorität des Dokumentarischen greift wirklichkeitskonstituierend in die Konfliktfelder von Identität, Politik und Geschichte ein und betrifft damit Fragen von Geschlecht, Nationalität, Rassismus und Propagan-da. Jede Dokumentation erzeugt ein Außen oder ein Anderes. Ziel der Tagung ist es, künstlerische, journalistische, juristische, politische und kulturelle Praktiken in den Blick zu nehmen, die jenes Außen oder Andere adressieren. Der Begriff des Gegen\Dokumentarischen dient als Zugang, um sich aus einer interdisziplinären Perspektive heraus neu dem Dokumentarischen zu widmen, seinen Wahrheitsanspruch zu hinterfragen und die Grenzen seines Geltungs- und Gegenstandsbereichs auszuloten und aufs Spiel zu setzen.
---
The counter\documentary (das Gegen\Dokumentarische) is a response to the provocation inherent in the notion of the documentary (das Dokumentarische). This provocation lies in the claim or desire to capture, represent, and control ›reality‹. Ever since documentary practices have been used, there have also been interventions against them. For us, the notion of the counter\documentary delineates a deliberately strategic attempt to antithetically sharpen and politicize the understanding of documentary media, operations, institutions, poetics, aesthetics, ways of writing, and modes of representation. The counter\documentary includes attempts to document otherwiseand others. The counter\documentary indicates another frame of documentation and invokes the other of the documentary.The authority of the documentary intervenes in fields of conflict including politics, history, and identity. By constituting realities it touches upon questions of gender, nationality, racism, and propaganda. Every act of documentation produces an outside or other. The notion of the counter\documentary is an instrument to address and describe different aspects of this antagonistic moment. Used as a means to readdress documentary practices from a critical distance the counter\documentary brings into focus artistic, journalistic, forensic, judicial, political, and cultural practices that position themselves as alternatives to established documentary practices and institutions. It prompts us to challenge the claim to truth inherent in the documentary and to explore and reevaluate the limits of its proper domain.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Edited Volumes by Matthias Preuss
multiple links between ecocriticism and animal studies, assessing the
relations between animals, environments and poetics. While ecocriticism usually relies on a relational approach to explore phenomena related to the environment or ecology more broadly, animal studies tends to examine individual or species-specific aspects. As a consequence, ecocriticism concentrates on ecopoetical, animal studies on zoopoetical elements and modes of representation in literature (and the arts more generally). Bringing key concepts of ecocriticism and animal studies into dialogue, the volume explores new ways of thinking about and reading texts, animals, and environments – not as separate entities but as part of the same collective.
Papers by Matthias Preuss
Book Chapters by Matthias Preuss
populate the fringes. In pursuit of arachnids in literature and its theory,
this contribution examines three different zoopoetological figures in
Ovid’s Metamorphoses—the spinning spider, the weaving spider, and the
secreting spider. Each of these figures conveys a different way in which
animals contribute to poetry and, thus, supports Aaron Moe’s affirmation
that animals are indeed “makers” (Moe 2013, 2): They can provide
the content, the form, and the medium of literature. What is more,
each figure also implicates a different way to think about literature—as
expression, as text, and as secretion. These ways are paraphrased at the end
of each section in terms of the theoretical writings of Roland Barthes.
Departing from the understanding of figures as “material–semiotic nodes
or knots” (Haraway 2008, 4), in what follows, I will unfold the material
and semiotic aspects of each figure. To contextualize and historicize
the tropes, I will relate them to the ancient knowledge about spiders
as set out in the writings of Aristotle and Pliny the Elder. In my analysis,
I distinguish between three interrelated levels of animal materiality:
subject matter, textuality, and corporeality. Drawing on Nicole Shukin’s
(2009) rubric of rendering, as well as the works of Bruce Holsinger
(2009) and Sarah Kay (2011) on parchment, I flesh out the notion of
corporeality, which I propose as an antidote to a reductive semiotic
approach to animals in texts. Textual webs are to be taken seriously as
traces that do not necessarily indicate a former animal presence but that
consist of actual animal matter. This conception of literature as secretion
resists the tendency to consume animals in theory. Spiders are more
than mere metaphors, and they seldom come alone. When we begin to
pull at the threads of arachnopoetic imagery, marine snails emerge and
flayed goats come to the fore. The following analysis not only serves as a
reminder of the fundamental entanglement of different life-forms (both
nonhuman and human), but also points out the poetic machinations that
are involved in pursuing literary animal studies and the becoming (zoo)
poetic of literary theory.
Conferences Organized by Matthias Preuss
---
The counter\documentary (das Gegen\Dokumentarische) is a response to the provocation inherent in the notion of the documentary (das Dokumentarische). This provocation lies in the claim or desire to capture, represent, and control ›reality‹. Ever since documentary practices have been used, there have also been interventions against them. For us, the notion of the counter\documentary delineates a deliberately strategic attempt to antithetically sharpen and politicize the understanding of documentary media, operations, institutions, poetics, aesthetics, ways of writing, and modes of representation. The counter\documentary includes attempts to document otherwiseand others. The counter\documentary indicates another frame of documentation and invokes the other of the documentary.The authority of the documentary intervenes in fields of conflict including politics, history, and identity. By constituting realities it touches upon questions of gender, nationality, racism, and propaganda. Every act of documentation produces an outside or other. The notion of the counter\documentary is an instrument to address and describe different aspects of this antagonistic moment. Used as a means to readdress documentary practices from a critical distance the counter\documentary brings into focus artistic, journalistic, forensic, judicial, political, and cultural practices that position themselves as alternatives to established documentary practices and institutions. It prompts us to challenge the claim to truth inherent in the documentary and to explore and reevaluate the limits of its proper domain.
multiple links between ecocriticism and animal studies, assessing the
relations between animals, environments and poetics. While ecocriticism usually relies on a relational approach to explore phenomena related to the environment or ecology more broadly, animal studies tends to examine individual or species-specific aspects. As a consequence, ecocriticism concentrates on ecopoetical, animal studies on zoopoetical elements and modes of representation in literature (and the arts more generally). Bringing key concepts of ecocriticism and animal studies into dialogue, the volume explores new ways of thinking about and reading texts, animals, and environments – not as separate entities but as part of the same collective.
populate the fringes. In pursuit of arachnids in literature and its theory,
this contribution examines three different zoopoetological figures in
Ovid’s Metamorphoses—the spinning spider, the weaving spider, and the
secreting spider. Each of these figures conveys a different way in which
animals contribute to poetry and, thus, supports Aaron Moe’s affirmation
that animals are indeed “makers” (Moe 2013, 2): They can provide
the content, the form, and the medium of literature. What is more,
each figure also implicates a different way to think about literature—as
expression, as text, and as secretion. These ways are paraphrased at the end
of each section in terms of the theoretical writings of Roland Barthes.
Departing from the understanding of figures as “material–semiotic nodes
or knots” (Haraway 2008, 4), in what follows, I will unfold the material
and semiotic aspects of each figure. To contextualize and historicize
the tropes, I will relate them to the ancient knowledge about spiders
as set out in the writings of Aristotle and Pliny the Elder. In my analysis,
I distinguish between three interrelated levels of animal materiality:
subject matter, textuality, and corporeality. Drawing on Nicole Shukin’s
(2009) rubric of rendering, as well as the works of Bruce Holsinger
(2009) and Sarah Kay (2011) on parchment, I flesh out the notion of
corporeality, which I propose as an antidote to a reductive semiotic
approach to animals in texts. Textual webs are to be taken seriously as
traces that do not necessarily indicate a former animal presence but that
consist of actual animal matter. This conception of literature as secretion
resists the tendency to consume animals in theory. Spiders are more
than mere metaphors, and they seldom come alone. When we begin to
pull at the threads of arachnopoetic imagery, marine snails emerge and
flayed goats come to the fore. The following analysis not only serves as a
reminder of the fundamental entanglement of different life-forms (both
nonhuman and human), but also points out the poetic machinations that
are involved in pursuing literary animal studies and the becoming (zoo)
poetic of literary theory.
---
The counter\documentary (das Gegen\Dokumentarische) is a response to the provocation inherent in the notion of the documentary (das Dokumentarische). This provocation lies in the claim or desire to capture, represent, and control ›reality‹. Ever since documentary practices have been used, there have also been interventions against them. For us, the notion of the counter\documentary delineates a deliberately strategic attempt to antithetically sharpen and politicize the understanding of documentary media, operations, institutions, poetics, aesthetics, ways of writing, and modes of representation. The counter\documentary includes attempts to document otherwiseand others. The counter\documentary indicates another frame of documentation and invokes the other of the documentary.The authority of the documentary intervenes in fields of conflict including politics, history, and identity. By constituting realities it touches upon questions of gender, nationality, racism, and propaganda. Every act of documentation produces an outside or other. The notion of the counter\documentary is an instrument to address and describe different aspects of this antagonistic moment. Used as a means to readdress documentary practices from a critical distance the counter\documentary brings into focus artistic, journalistic, forensic, judicial, political, and cultural practices that position themselves as alternatives to established documentary practices and institutions. It prompts us to challenge the claim to truth inherent in the documentary and to explore and reevaluate the limits of its proper domain.