Shaviro on Gilded Age Literature and Inequality @DanielShaviro


Daniel Shaviro, New York University School of Law, has published Gilded Age Literature and Inequality. Here is the abstract.

We are an intensely social species, and often a rivalrous one, prone to measuring ourselves in terms of others, and often directly against others. Accordingly, relative position matters to our sense of wellbeing, although excluded from standard economic models that look only at the utility derived from own consumption of commodities plus leisure. For example, people can have deep-seated psychological responses to inequality and social hierarchy, creating the potential for extreme wealth differences to invoked feelings of superiority and inferiority, or dominance and subordination, that may powerfully affect how we relate to each other.

The tools that one needs to understand how and why this matters include the sociological and the qualitative. In my book-in-progress, Dangerous Grandiosity: Literary Perspectives on High-End Inequality Through the First Gilded Age, I use the particular tool of in-depth studies of particular classic works of literature (from Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice through Theodore Dreiser’s The Financier and The Titan) that offer suggestive insights regarding the felt experiences around high-end inequality at different times and from different perspectives. A successor volume will carry this account through the twentieth century and up to the present.

On May 17, 2018, at Stanford Law School, I gave a talk on the book project in general, and a chapter on E.M. Forster’s Howards End in particular. This paper offers the approximate text of that talk.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.



Source link

Related posts

Leave a Comment