Editorial
From the Editor
(published in GQ 82.4)
Close reading is a concept closely associated with the “modernist discourse”
that prevailed roughly from 1905 to 1975. The premise was the primacy
of the aesthetic: in order to make “life” meaningful, one should strive to
grasp as many dimensions as possible of the great works of art, especially poems.
It was never certain that the aesthetic could be translated back into lived
meaning—but close reading was the only true way; everyday aspirations depended
on it.
This GQ Forum illustrates how far we have come from those assumptions.
The aesthetic no longer dominates our values. But the “meaning[s]” of contemporary
art remain indispensable; & close reading has become a way of articulating
the micro-levels of consciousness that both relate us to and separate
us from aesthetic creations. Dr Gilfillan’s statement that “listeners are at the
core of any close reading of a sound object” certainly inverts the priorities of
modernist aesthetics; & Dr Newman’s inclusion of the specifics of the book’s
edition/history/locality similarly de-centers the modernist dream of singular
essence. Yet the phrase “close reading” is still deployed as a crucial way of relating
to aesthetic or other constructed phenomena. In short, “post-modern
close reading” is not a contradiction but a core element of cultural studies. No
more distance or reverence: indeed the reader’s socio-historical moment is
fundamental to the process. We hope GQ readers will send us responses to this
Forum at german.quarterly@duke.edu.
James L. Rolleston