Back

Dynamic Form: How Intermediality Made Modernism by Cara L. Lewis (review).

  • Published In: Modernism/Modernity, 2023, v. 30, n. 1. P. 221 1 of 3

  • Database: Academic Search Ultimate 2 of 3

  • Authored By: Najarian, Jonathan 3 of 3

Abstract

We're reminded of Albright's ideas about the harmony and dissonance of modernist interart practices: it would not be right to say that modernist artists had a uniform response to the rapid expansion of early twentieth-century aesthetics. This is not, as Lewis makes clear, a straightforward return to "the ahistorical, apolitical posture" of New Critical formalism after a long sojourn through New Historicism; rather, like so much new formalist scholarship, Lewis seeks to provide a definition of form that is attentive - and even gives shape - to political power ( I Dynamic Form i , 11). [Extracted from the article]

Additional Information

  • Source:Modernism/Modernity. 2023/01, Vol. 30, Issue 1, p221
  • Document Type:Article
  • Subject Area:Social Sciences and Humanities
  • Publication Date:2023
  • ISSN:1071-6068
  • DOI:10.1353/mod.2023.a902613
  • Accession Number:165109668
  • Copyright Statement:Copyright of Modernism/Modernity is the property of Johns Hopkins University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.