2c ii.

bakhtin
Lukacs’ conception of realism already suggests how realism might serve as a particularly useful
genre for engaging with the Anthropocene: As discussed in the previous chapter, if we take seriously
Timothy Morton’s positioning of the Anthropocene as a hyperobject, then Lukacs’ insistence, following
Lenin, on realism's drive toward totality offers a generatively open-ended disposition for dealing with
the Anthropocene’s phenomenal inexhaustibility. Similarly, his characterization of realism as a refusal
to retreat from ideological conflict offers a useful corrective to the dominant liberal humanist framing
of the Anthropocene described in the previous chapter.

Already, then, we’re beginning to see the broad contours of how this chapter might respond to
Ghosh’s critique of literary realism’s relationship to climate change. Still though,

For Bakhtin, the novel as a whole is a kind of mutable generic formation: In this sense, he collapses
the distinction we’ve thus far been trying to draw between “genre” and “mode” into a single open-
ended formal category. Broadly stated, though, whether he calls it a genre or mode, Bakhtin’s
concern is the general mutability of the the novel. As he describes, the novel "renews itself by
incorporating extraliterary heteroglos​sia and the 'novelistic' layers of literary language, they become
dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally— this is the
most important thing— the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic
openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still​ evolving contemporary reality (the openended
present).” (7)

Mary Louise Pratt: “The Anthropocene creates a new chronotope with a multipolar time-
space configuration. The human in the present imagines a subject who, long after humans
are gone, reconstructs our era through what it will have left behind”(Arts of Living G170-71).

Lukacs’ conception of realism already suggests how realism might serve as a particularly useful
genre for engaging with the Anthropocene: As discussed in the previous chapter, if we take seriously
Timothy Morton’s positioning of the Anthropocene as a hyperobject, then Lukacs’ insistence, following
Lenin, on realism's drive toward totality offers a generatively open-ended disposition for dealing with
the Anthropocene’s phenomenal inexhaustibility. Similarly, his characterization of realism as a refusal
to retreat from ideological conflict offers a useful corrective to the dominant liberal humanist framing
of the Anthropocene described in the previous chapter.

Already, then, we’re beginning to see the broad contours of how this chapter might respond to
Ghosh’s critique of literary realism’s relationship to climate change. Still though,
For Bakhtin, the novel as a whole is a kind of mutable generic formation: In this sense, he collapses
the distinction we’ve thus far been trying to draw between “genre” and “mode” into a single open-
ended formal category. Broadly stated, though, whether he calls it a genre or mode, Bakhtin’s
concern is the general mutability of the the novel. As he describes, the novel "renews itself by
incorporating extraliterary heteroglos​sia and the 'novelistic' layers of literary language, they become
dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally— this is the
most important thing— the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic
openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still​ evolving contemporary reality (the openended
present).” (7)

Mary Louise Pratt: “The Anthropocene creates a new chronotope with a multipolar time-
space configuration. The human in the present imagines a subject who, long after humans
are gone, reconstructs our era through what it will have left behind”(Arts of Living G170-71).
Lukacs’ conception of realism already suggests how realism might serve as a particularly useful
genre for engaging with the Anthropocene: As discussed in the previous chapter, if we take seriously
Timothy Morton’s positioning of the Anthropocene as a hyperobject, then Lukacs’ insistence, following
Lenin, on realism's drive toward totality offers a generatively open-ended disposition for dealing with
the Anthropocene’s phenomenal inexhaustibility. Similarly, his characterization of realism as a refusal
to retreat from ideological conflict offers a useful corrective to the dominant liberal humanist framing
of the Anthropocene described in the previous chapter.

Already, then, we’re beginning to see the broad contours of how this chapter might respond to
Ghosh’s critique of literary realism’s relationship to climate change. Still though,

For Bakhtin, the novel as a whole is a kind of mutable generic formation: In this sense, he collapses
the distinction we’ve thus far been trying to draw between “genre” and “mode” into a single open-
ended formal category. Broadly stated, though, whether he calls it a genre or mode, Bakhtin’s
concern is the general mutability of the the novel. As he describes, the novel "renews itself by
incorporating extraliterary heteroglos​sia and the 'novelistic' layers of literary language, they become
dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally— this is the
most important thing— the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic
openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still​ evolving contemporary reality (the openended
present).” (7)

Mary Louise Pratt: “The Anthropocene creates a new chronotope with a multipolar time-
space configuration. The human in the present imagines a subject who, long after humans
are gone, reconstructs our era through what it will have left behind”(Arts of Living G170-71).
Lukacs’ conception of realism already suggests how realism might serve as a particularly useful
genre for engaging with the Anthropocene: As discussed in the previous chapter, if we take seriously
Timothy Morton’s positioning of the Anthropocene as a hyperobject, then Lukacs’ insistence, following
Lenin, on realism's drive toward totality offers a generatively open-ended disposition for dealing with
the Anthropocene’s phenomenal inexhaustibility. Similarly, his characterization of realism as a refusal
to retreat from ideological conflict offers a useful corrective to the dominant liberal humanist framing
of the Anthropocene described in the previous chapter.

Already, then, we’re beginning to see the broad contours of how this chapter might respond to
Ghosh’s critique of literary realism’s relationship to climate change. Still though,

For Bakhtin, the novel as a whole is a kind of mutable generic formation: In this sense, he collapses
the distinction we’ve thus far been trying to draw between “genre” and “mode” into a single open-
ended formal category. Broadly stated, though, whether he calls it a genre or mode, Bakhtin’s
concern is the general mutability of the the novel. As he describes, the novel "renews itself by
incorporating extraliterary heteroglos​sia and the 'novelistic' layers of literary language, they become
dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally— this is the
most important thing— the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic
openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still​ evolving contemporary reality (the openended
present).” (7)

Mary Louise Pratt: “The Anthropocene creates a new chronotope with a multipolar time-
space configuration. The human in the present imagines a subject who, long after humans
are gone, reconstructs our era through what it will have left behind”(Arts of Living G170-71).
Lukacs’ conception of realism already suggests how realism might serve as a particularly useful
genre for engaging with the Anthropocene: As discussed in the previous chapter, if we take seriously
Timothy Morton’s positioning of the Anthropocene as a hyperobject, then Lukacs’ insistence, following
Lenin, on realism's drive toward totality offers a generatively open-ended disposition for dealing with
the Anthropocene’s phenomenal inexhaustibility. Similarly, his characterization of realism as a refusal
to retreat from ideological conflict offers a useful corrective to the dominant liberal humanist framing
of the Anthropocene described in the previous chapter.

Already, then, we’re beginning to see the broad contours of how this chapter might respond to
Ghosh’s critique of literary realism’s relationship to climate change. Still though,

For Bakhtin, the novel as a whole is a kind of mutable generic formation: In this sense, he collapses
the distinction we’ve thus far been trying to draw between “genre” and “mode” into a single open-
ended formal category. Broadly stated, though, whether he calls it a genre or mode, Bakhtin’s
concern is the general mutability of the the novel. As he describes, the novel "renews itself by
incorporating extraliterary heteroglos​sia and the 'novelistic' layers of literary language, they become
dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally— this is the
most important thing— the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic
openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still​ evolving contemporary reality (the openended
present).” (7)
Mary Louise Pratt: “The Anthropocene creates a new chronotope with a multipolar time-
space configuration. The human in the present imagines a subject who, long after humans
are gone, reconstructs our era through what it will have left behind”(Arts of Living G170-71).
Lukacs’ conception of realism already suggests how realism might serve as a particularly useful
genre for engaging with the Anthropocene: As discussed in the previous chapter, if we take seriously
Timothy Morton’s positioning of the Anthropocene as a hyperobject, then Lukacs’ insistence, following
Lenin, on realism's drive toward totality offers a generatively open-ended disposition for dealing with
the Anthropocene’s phenomenal inexhaustibility. Similarly, his characterization of realism as a refusal
to retreat from ideological conflict offers a useful corrective to the dominant liberal humanist framing
of the Anthropocene described in the previous chapter.

Already, then, we’re beginning to see the broad contours of how this chapter might respond to
Ghosh’s critique of literary realism’s relationship to climate change. Still though,

For Bakhtin, the novel as a whole is a kind of mutable generic formation: In this sense, he collapses
the distinction we’ve thus far been trying to draw between “genre” and “mode” into a single open-
ended formal category. Broadly stated, though, whether he calls it a genre or mode, Bakhtin’s
concern is the general mutability of the the novel. As he describes, the novel "renews itself by
incorporating extraliterary heteroglos​sia and the 'novelistic' layers of literary language, they become
dialogized, permeated with laughter, irony, humor, elements of self-parody and finally— this is the
most important thing— the novel inserts into these other genres an indeterminacy, a certain semantic
openendedness, a living contact with unfinished, still​ evolving contemporary reality (the openended
present).” (7)

Mary Louise Pratt: “The Anthropocene creates a new chronotope with a multipolar time-
space configuration. The human in the present imagines a subject who, long after humans
are gone, reconstructs our era through what it will have left behind”(Arts of Living G170-71).