Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Affective Crisis and the Possibility of Attachment: A comparative study of contemporary fiction in neoliberal ruins

Research output: Book/ReportBookAcademic

Abstract

Affective Crisis and the Possibility of Attachment offers a comparative critical study of contemporary fiction. It intervenes in discussions about contemporary fiction in its literary-historical relationship to postmodernism and in its socio-historical relationship to neoliberalism. It argues that contemporary literature is dominated by affective questions that are rooted in, but not fully subsumed by, neoliberalism: ‘How can I experience reality (as real)?’; ‘How can I feel attached to someone?’ This ‘affective dominant’ signals a diachronical shift from postmodernist fiction’s pervasive epistemological and ontological reflections to a focus on questions of an affective nature in contemporary fiction. It also offers a perspective on contemporary fiction as mediating neoliberalism’s double-edged dynamics of commodifying affective experience while privatising collective experience.

The book argues that contemporary fiction develops emergent mediations of neoliberal dynamics, with the affective crises the latter yield. It studies this affective crisis in relation to central themes as identity and climate crisis, and through prevalent contemporary genres as autofiction and coming-of-age narratives. The book explores a transnational corpus, including authors Heike Geissler, Ben Lerner, Édouard Louis, Valeria Luiselli, Ling Ma, Lieke Marsman, Mohamed Mbougar Sarr, Niña Weijers and Alejandro Zambra, amongst others.
Original languageEnglish
Place of PublicationLondon
PublisherUCL Press
ISBN (Electronic)9781806550425
ISBN (Print)9781806550395
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2026

Publication series

NameCOMPARATIVE LITERATURE AND CULTURE

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Affective Crisis and the Possibility of Attachment: A comparative study of contemporary fiction in neoliberal ruins'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this