000			04225nam a22003374a 4500
999			_c61220 _d61220
003			IN-MiVU
005			20240712164354.0
006			m go d |
007			cr |||||||||||
008			240712s2020 xxu gob 001 0 eng
020			_a9780197511213 _cGBP265.21 _q(e-book)
024	7		_2DOI: _ahttps://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197511176.001.0001
040			_beng _cIN-MiVU
082	0	4	_221 _a808 _bELL/T
100	1		_aElliott, K., _d1957- _eauthor _q(Kamilla)
245	1	0	_aTheorizing adaptation / _c by Kamilla Elliott. _h[electronic resource]
260	3		_aNew York : _bOxford University Press, _c2020.
300			_ae-book contains 374 pages
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
505	0		_aContents Front Matter Copyright Page Dedication Acknowledgments ExpandIntroduction: The Problem of Theorizing Adaptation View chapter Part I Theorizing Adaptation Kamilla Elliott Expand1 Histories of Theorizing Adaptation View chapter Expand2 Theorizing Adaptation in the Sixteenth to Nineteenth Centuries View chapter Expand3 Theorizing Adaptation in the Twentieth Century View chapter Expand4 Theorizing Adaptation in the Twenty-First Century View chapter Part II Adapting Theorization Kamilla Elliott Section I Retheorizing Theorization: Introduction View part front matter Expand5 Redefining Definitions View chapter Expand6 Resetting Taxonomies View chapter Expand7 Rethinking Theoretical Principles View chapter Section II Refiguring Theorization: Introduction View part front matter Expand8 The Rhetoric of Theorizing Adaptation View chapter Expand9 Refiguring Adaptation Studies View chapter Conclusion: Adaptation and Theorization View chapter End Matter ExpandNotes Bibliography Index
520	3		_aAbstract Asking why adaptation has been seen as more problematic to theorize than other humanities subjects, and why it has been more theoretically problematic in the humanities than in the sciences and social sciences, Theorizing Adaptation seeks to both explicate and redress “the problem of theorizing adaptation” through a metacritical history of theorizing adaptation from the late sixteenth century to the present, a metatheoretical theory of the relationship between theorization and adaptation in the humanities, and analysis of and experimentation with the rhetoric of theorizing adaptation. Adaptation was not always the bad theoretical object that it increasingly became from the late eighteenth century: in earlier centuries, adaptation was celebrated and valued as a means of aesthetic and cultural progress. Tracing the falling fortunes of adaptation under humanities theorization, the history nevertheless locates dissenting voices valorizing adaptation in every period. Adaptation studies can learn from history not only how to theorize adaptation more positively, but also to consider “the problem of theorization” for adaptation. The metatheoretical section finds that theorization and adaptation are rival, overlapping, inimical processes, each seeking to remake culture—and each other—in their images. It is not simply the case that adaptation has to adapt to theorization: rather, theorization needs to adapt to and through adaptation. The final section attends to the rhetoric of theorizing adaptation, analyzing how tiny pieces of rhetoric have constructed adaptation’s relationship to theorization, and turning to figurative rhetoric, or figuration, as a third process that can mediate between adaptation and theorization and refigure their relationship. _cProvided by publisher.
588			_aDescription based on print version record and CIP data provided by publisher; resource not viewed.
650		0	_aLiterature _xAdaptations _xHistory and criticism.
650		0	_aFilm adaptations _xHistory and criticism.
653	0	0	_aLiterary Theory and Cultural Studies
776	0	8	_iPrint version: _aElliott, Kamilla, 1957- _tTheorizing adaptation _dNew York : Oxford University Press, 2020. _z9780197511176 _w(DLC) 2019049084
856	4	0	_3https://academic.oup.com/book/36670 _uhttps://academic.oup.com/book/36670 _yClick here
906			_d1
942			_2ddc _cEB