This chapter makes a threefold argument for paying a richer and more detailed attention to rhythms, both social and aesthetic. It starts with the importance of attending to the temporal forms that structure historicist literary and cultural studies scholarship. It argues that the heterogeneity and endurance of social rhythms invites a new kind of sociocultural analysis, asking us to reimagine the social landscape as characterized by contending rhythms that extend forward and backward in time. The second part of the chapter asks how we might put this kind of analysis to use. It focuses on one example from the late 1920s, when avant-garde artists managed to alter US law by cannily recognizing the work of multiple social rhythms. It makes the case that despite their power to coerce and organize, rhythms, like bounded wholes, can be put to strategic ends and have the potential to work with and against other forms to surprisingly transformative political effect. Finally, the chapter asks how a new approach to rhythm might help us to rethink the relations between literary forms and social arrangements.
Princeton Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.