Untitled

dc.contributor.authorBruce Carrollen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-12T07:23:44Z
dc.date.available2019-08-12T07:23:44Z
dc.date.issued2017-03-??
dc.description.abstractThis article redresses an oversight in current eco-theory that offers no means for revising still-persistent conceptions of nature and the natural. It proposes an ecologizing mode of analysis as one corrective. Throughout the essay is an attempt to redeem the human, the artificial, and with them, the city. The argument discovers along the way that in order to profess its non-existence, one must name and thus reify nature, a linguistic curiosity that makes clearer the extent of nature’s ideological reach. This reflexive foil should be taken into consideration by those who find the persistence of nature troubling to the future of eco-theory and eco-awareness.en_US
dc.identifierA05BE745-F5EB-4778-7748-307315B3757B
dc.identifier.urihttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/84224
dc.language英文
dc.publisher英語學系zh_tw
dc.publisherDepartment of English, NTNUen_US
dc.relation43(1),145-164
dc.relation.ispartof同心圓:文學與文化研究zh_tw
dc.subject.othernatureen_US
dc.subject.otherarten_US
dc.subject.othereco-arten_US
dc.subject.otherideologyen_US
dc.subject.otherLevi R. Bryanten_US
dc.subject.otherTimothy Mortonen_US
dc.subject.otherSlavoj Žižeken_US
dc.subject.otherRen Jieen_US
dc.title.alternativeA Role for Art in Ecological Thoughtzh_tw

Files