Introduction * C
NOTES Introduction * C. G.Jung, Psychological Types, val. 6 of The Collected Works if C. G.]ung, trans. R. F. C. Hull (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971), p. 52. 1. The psychoanalytic dimension of this interchange is discussed in Paul Schilder, "The Libidinous Structure of the Body-Image," in his The Image and Appearance if the Human Body (New York: International Universities Press, 1950), pp. 119-212. 2. Louise 0. Fradenburg, City, Marriage, Tournament: Arts if Rule in Late Medieval Scotland (Madison: University ofWisconsin Press, 1991), p. 249. 3. See Jeffrey Jerome Cohen, "Monster Culture (Seven Theses);' in his Monster Theory: Reading Culture (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), pp. 3-25, and Of Giants: Sex, Monsters, and the Middle Ages (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999). 4. L. 0. Aranye Fradenburg, Sacrifice Your Love: Psychoanalysis, Historicism, Chaucer (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002). 5. Georg Simmel, "The Stranger," The Sociology if Geotg Simmel, trans. and ed. Kurt H. Wolff (New York: Free Press, 1950), p. 405 [402-408]. 6. A. David Napier, Foreign Bodies: Performance, Art, and Symbolic Anthropology (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), pp. 139-40. 7. Napier, Foreign Bodies, p. 156. 8. On this issue, see Homi K. Bhabha, "The Other Question: Stereotype, Discrimination, and the Discourse of Colonialism;' in his The Location of Culture (New York: Routledge, 1994), pp. 66-84. Bhabha shows how stereo typing is based at once upon "daemonic repetition" and absolute rigidity, such that stereotyping's apparent fixity, as sign of difference, is paradoxical. Stereotyping thus carries within it the force of ambivalence, a force that is, e.g., largely ignored, as Bhabha points out, by critics and readers of oriental ism, Said included.
[Show full text]