日本英文学会第８１回大会
東京大学駒場キャンパス
２００９年５月３０日
東京大学大学院・高村峰生

mineo.takamura@gmail.com
失われた手: The House of Mirth における読む行為と身体の接触

1. What is reading, in the last analysis, but an interchange of thought between writer andreader? If the book enters the reader's mind just as it left the writer's — without any of theadditions and modifications inevitably produced by contact with a new body of thought —it has been read to no purpose. In such cases, of course, the reader is not always to blame.
There are books that are always the same — incapable of modifying or of being modified— but these do not count as factors in literature. The value of books is proportionate towhat may be called their plasticity — their quality of being all things to all men, of being
diversely moulded by the impact of fresh forms of thought. Where, from one cause or theother, this reciprocal adaptability is lacking, there can be no real intercourse between bookand reader. In this sense it may be said that there is no abstract standard of values inliterature: the greatest books ever written are worth to each reader only what he can get outof them. (“The Vice of Reading” 99)
2. Tableaux vivants depend for their effect not only on the happy disposal of lights and thedelusive interposition of layers of gauze, but on a corresponding adjustment of the mentalvision. To unfurnished minds they remain, in spite of every enhancement of art, only asuperior kind of wax-works; but to the responsive fancy they may give magic glimpses ofthe boundary world between fact and imagination. (131)
3. It was not the first time that Selden had heard Lily’s beauty lightly remarked on, andhitherto the tone of the comments had imperceptibly coloured his view of her. But now it
woke only a motion of indignant contempt. This was the world she lived in, these were thestandards by which she was fated to be measured! Does one go to Caliban for a judgment
on Miranda? (133)
4. In the long moment before the curtain fell, he had time to feel the whole tragedy of herlife. It was as though her beauty, thus detached from all that cheapened and vulgarized it,
had held out suppliant hands to him from the world in which he and she had once met fora moment, and where he felt an overmastering longing to be with her again.
He was roused by the pressure of ecstatic fingers. “Wasn’t she too beautiful, Lawrence?
Don’t make you like her best in that simple dress? It makes her look like the real Lily—theLily I know.” (133 emphasis mine)5. Mrs. Peniston felt as if there had been a contagious illness in the house, and she wasdoomed to sit shivering among her contaminated furniture. (125)
6. Alone with her cousin’s kiss, Gerty stared upon her thoughts. He had kissed her before—
but not with another woman on his lips. (158)
7. If I were shabby no one would have me: a woman is asked out as much for her clothes asfor herself. The clothes are the background, the frame, if you like: they don't make success,but they are a part of it. Who wants a dingy woman? We are expected to be pretty and welldressed till we drop….” (13-14)
8. She knew that she hated dinginess as much as her mother had hated it, and to her last
breath she meant to fight against it, dragging herself up again and again above its flood till
she gained the bright pinnacles of success which presented such a slippery surface to herclutch. (40)
9. Dirt … is never a unique, isolated event. Where there is dirt there is system. Dirt is theby-product of a systematic ordering and classification of matter, in so far as ordering
involves rejecting inappropriate elements. This idea of dirt takes us straight into the field of
symbolism and promises a link-up with more obviously symbolic systems of purity.
(Douglas 35)
10. The word contagion means literally “to touch together,” and one of its earliest usages in
the fourteenth century referred to the circulation of ideas and attitudes. It frequently
connoted danger or corruption. Revolutionary ideas were contagious, as were hereticalbeliefs and practices. Folly and immorality were more often labeled contagious than werewisdom or virtue. The medical usage of the term was no more and no less metaphoricalthan its ideational counterpart. The circulation of disease and the circulation of ideas werematerial and experiential, even if not visible. Both displayed the power and danger ofbodies in contact and demonstrated the simultaneous fragility and tenacity of social bonds.
(Wald 12-13)
コスモス

11. 私たちの世界が、もはや自らが＜宇宙＝秩序＞になろうと欲するときではない――＜自然＞の次元を越えた＜精神＞になりえないのと同様に――ということを僅かでも理解するならば、その世界にできることは自己のうちで不浄＝非世界的なるものの汚穢さに触れることだけであると思われる。(ナンシー 76)[l’abjection de l’immonde]

参考文献
Chapman, Mary. “‘Living Pictures’: Women and Tableaux Vivants in Nineteenth-Century AmericanFiction and Culture.” Wide Angle. 18. 3. (Summer 1996): 22-52.
Derrida, Jacques. Le Toucher: Jean-Luc Nancy. Paris: Galilée, 1998.
Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. NewYork: Routledge, 1964.
Duvall, J. Michael. “The Futile and the Dingy.” Memorial Boxes and Guarded Interiors: EdithWharton and Material Culture. Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P. 2007. 159-186.
Kassanoff, Jennie A. Edith Wharton and the Politics of the Race. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004.
Lee, Hermione. Edith Wharton. New York: Knopf, 2007.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. “Eye and Mind.” The Primacy of perception. Evanston: Northwestern UP,
1964. 159-190.
Micheals, Walter Benn. The Gold Standard and the Logic of Naturalism. Berkley: U of California P,1987.
Nancy, Jean-Luc. Corpus. Paris: Seuil, 2000.
Waid, Candace. "Burying the Regional Mother: Faulkner's Road to Race Through the Visual Arts,"
Faulkner Journal. 23.1. (Fall 2007): 37-92.
———. Edith Wharton’s Letters from the Underground. Chapel Hill: North Carolina UP. 1991.
Wald, Priscilla. Contagious. Duhram: Duke UP, 2008.
Wharton, Edith. The House of Mirth. Oxford: Oxford UP. 1994.
———. “The Vice of Reading,” The Uncollected Critical Writings. Ed. Frederick Wegener. Princeton:
Princeton UP, 1997.
デリダ、ジャック.

『触覚、ジャン＝リュック・ナンシーに触れる』、松葉祥一・榊原達哉ほか訳、青土社、2006 年.
ナンシー、ジャン=リュック. 『共同-体』、大西雅一郎訳、松籟社、1996 年.