Literary Criticism - C.E. Bressler

l it e r a r y
C R IT IC IS M
An Introduction
to Theory and Practice
If youre wondering why you

should buy the 5"' edition of e m erging field of ecocriticism to reflect
Literary Criticism, here are four the latest scholarship in literary criticise
great reasons!
N e w Chapters: Entire chapters have
Charles E. Bressler
o N e w p r o fe s s io n a l e s s a y s represent a been dedicated to: Postcolonial Literati
Indiana Wesleyan U niversity
se m in a l w o rk w ith in select literary schools. Q ueer Theory, and African American
A se p ara te a p p e n d ix c o n ta in s e ssa ys that Criticism to give each of these importat

sc h oo ls adequate coverage.
p ro v id e p ro fe ssio n a l e x a m p le s in c lu d in g
w o r k s b y C le a n th B ro o k s a n d Jacque Consistent Literary Model: All school!
D e rrid a that p ro v id e in sig h t to t he sc h oo l o f criticism are applied to a common
b e in g studied. se lec tion - "Young Goodman Brown" to
sh o w h o w one work can be interpreted

N e w se c tio n o n Eco criticism : The n ew
m any different ways.
e ditio n in c lu d e s a c ha pte r centered o n the
Longm an
Boston Columbus Indianapolis N ew York San F ra n cisco
Upper Saddle River Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai L o n d o n M a d rid
Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto Delhi M exico C ity S a o P a u lo
Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo
Makeup: ...........* r * / W <
, , , n c c li 8 wWU- .....
ss
rinter and ^
&^ __________
-------- ------ -
____________
rj^hts reServed. No part of this
_ _ _ ------ T T lIo n Education, Inc- transmitted, in any form or by
- - ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ . o r e d in a ^ t o r d t n g , or o.herwise, whu, .he pn.
'?bl ^ ^ .h e U h r a r r u r C o u ^
j. f i av au ^ ie i
- -- t i A l l
1. r t i l
5 6 7 8 9 1()DOH15 14 13
Longman
is an imprint of
205-2^21^
01214-^
- e
www.pearsonhighered.com
Co n t e n t s
Foreword xi
To the Reader xiii
\ Defining Criticism, Theory, and Literature 1
Listening to a Conversation 1
Eavesdropping on a Literature Classroom 2
Can a Text Have More Than One Interpretation? 4
How to Become a Literary Critic 5
What Is Literary Criticism? 6
What Is Literary Theory? 7
Making Meaning from Text 9
The Reading Process and Literary Theory 10
What Is Literature? 12
Literary Theory and the Definition of Literature 14
The Function of Literature and Literary Theory 15
Beginning the Formal Study of Literary Theory 17
2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism 19
Introduction 19
Plato (c. 427-347 BCE) 20
Aristotle (384-322 BCE) 22
Horace (65-8 BCE) 24
Longinus (First Century CE) 25
Plotinus (204-270 CE) 26
Dante Alighieri (1265-1321) 27
Giovanni Boccaccio (1313-1375) 28
Sir Philip Sidney (1554-1586) 29
John Dryden (1631-1700) 30
Joseph Addison (1672-1719) 32
Alexander Pope (1688-1744) 33
William Wordsworth (1770-1850) 34
Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822) 37
Hippolyte Adolphe Taine (18281893) 38
Matthew Arnold (1822-1888) 40
Henry Jam es (1843-1916) 42
Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975) 44
Modern Literary Criticism 40
V
VI
Contents
, Russian Formalism and New Criticism <

Introduction
Russinn Formalism 48
B duintf the Gap between Russian Formalism and New
Applying Russian Form alism to a Literary Text 51
New Criticism 52
Historical Development 54
Assumptions 56
Methodology 60
Questions for Analysis 63
Critiques and Responses 63
4 Reader-oriented Criticism 65
Introduction 65
7. A. Richards 70
Louise M. Rosenblatt 72
Assumptions 73
Methodology 75
Structuralism 76
G erald P rince 76
Phenomenology 77
H ans R obert J auss 78
W olfgang Iser 78
Subjective Criticism 80
N orman H olland 80
D avid B leich 80
A Two-step Methodology 81
5 Modemity/Postmodernism: Structuralism/
Poststructuralism: Deconstruction 85
M odernity 85
Poststructuralism or P ostm od ernism 88
Modernity to M odernism 90
Structuralism: Its H istorical D ev elo p m en t 91
Pre-Saussurean Linguistics 91
Saussure's Linguistic Revolution 92
The Structure o f Language 93
Langue and Parole 96
s Redefinition of 96
Assumptions of Structu
98
M r/h0? 0lw8ies of S ^ uct 100
C/awrfe Levi-Strauss p
Roland Barthes 101
Contents vii
Vladimir Propp and Narratology U)2

Tzvclan Todarov and Gerard Genetic 105
Jonathan Culler 104
A Model of Interpretation 705
From Structuralism to Poststructuralism: Deconstruction 105
Deconstruction: Its Historical Development 107
Deconstruction: Its Beginnings 707
Derrida's Starting Place: Structuralism 108
Derrida's Interpretation of Saussures Sign 109
Assum ptions of Deconstruction 109
Transcendental Signified 109
Logocen trism 110
Binary Oppositions 110
Phonocentrism 111
Metaphysics of Presence 111
M ethodology 112
Acknowledging Binary Operations in Western Thought 112
Arche-writing 112
Supplementation 114
Differance 114
Deconstructive Suppositions for Textual Analysis 116
Deconstruction: A New Reading Strategy 117
American Deconstructionists 118
Structuralism 119
Deconstruction 120
Structuralism 120
Deconstruction 121
6 Psychoanalytic Criticism 123

Introduction 123
Historical D ev elo p m en t 125
Sigmund Freud 125
M odels of the H uman P syche : D ynamic M odel 125
E conomic M odel 126
T ypographical M odels 126
F reud ' s P re-O edipal D evelopmental P hase 127
T he O edipus, C astration, and E lectra C omplexes 128
T he S ignificance of D reams 129
L iterature and P sychoanalysis 130
Carl G. Jung 130
North rop Frye 132
Jacques Lacan 133
L acan 's M odel of the H uman P syche 134
' L acan and T extual A nalysis 136
The Present State of Psychoanalytic Criticism 136
Assumptions 137
V
yjjj C ontents
Methodologies iJo
7 Feminism 143
Introduction 143
Virginia Woolf 148
Simone de Beauvoir 149
Kate Millet ISO
Feminism in the 1960s, "70s, and '80s 150
Elaine Showalter 152
Geographical Strains o f F'emin ism 153
A mikk AN 154
B ritish 155
F rincm 155
Present-day Fem inist C riticism s 157
A ssum ptions 159
M ethodology 160
Q uestions for A nalysis 161
C ritiques and R e s p o n s e s 161
8 Marxism 165
Introduction 165
H istorical D evelopm ent 166
AuJ/7 Marx and Friedrich Engels 166
Russia and Marxism 170
Georg Lukdcs 171
The Frankfurt School 171
Antonio Gramsci 172
Louis Althusser 173
M arxist Theorists Today 174
A ssum ptions 176
M ethodology 178
C ritiques and Responses 180
9 Cultural Poetics or New Historicism 181

Introduction 181
A N ew -Critical Lecture 181
Old H istoricism 182
The New H istoricism 183
Historical D evelopm ent 183
Cultural M aterialism 187
New Historicism 188
C ontents ix
Assumptions 188
Michel Foucault 198
Clifford Geertz 190
Texts, History, and Interpretation 191
What Cultural Poetics Rejects 192
W hat Cultural Poetics Does and Accepts 192
M ethodology 193
1 0 Postcolonialism 197
Postcolonialism : "T h e Em pire W rites B ack" 199
Assumptions 203
M ethodology 206
Critiques and Response 209
11 African-American Criticism 210

H istorical D evelopm ent, A ssum ptions, and M ethodology 211
C ritiques and Responses 218
12 Queer Theory: Gay and Lesbian Criticism 220

H istorical D evelopm ent and A ssum ptions 224
Queer Critical Theorists 227
Critiques and Response 229
13 Ecocriticism 230
W hat Is Ecocriticism ? 231
A ssum ptions 234
M ethodology 235
Literary Selection 239

"Young G oodm an Brow n (1835)," N athaniel H aw thorne 239
Readings on Literary Criticism 249

"The Form alist C ritics," C leanth Brooks 250
"Structure, Sign and Play in the D iscourse of the
Hum an Scien ces," Jacques Derrida 256
X Contents
"I leroie ItlhiuH'entrism: The? Idea of Universality i,

Charles I.arson 272 y IJh?r,ltlJ
"Criteria of Nej;ro Art," 276
"Queer Theory," Annamario Jagose 284
"John Keats and Nature, mi Ucocriticnl In q u iry "
Charles Ngiewih TUKE 288 7'
Glossary 301
Index 332
Y
Foreword
The dramatist, poet, novelist, and critic ( )s<ar Wilde declared that the artist
is the creator of beautiful things and that "The critic is [onej who can trans
late into another manner or a now material fone'sj impression of beautiful
things . . . When critic's disagree, tlu* artist is in accord with him fherjself."
Accordingly, it is the literary critic who transacts with the text, explores his
torical contexts, actively reads, and joyously participates in numerous other
modes of "translating" the beautiful thing of literature.
For exam ple, the French poet, novelist, and playwright Victor Hugo,
wrote, "To learn to read is to kindle a fire; every syllable spelled sparkles."
Upon reading this line.*, a Structuralist critic analyzes the metaphors of fire
and sparkles; a Marxist critic contemplates the class structures that may be
influencing the heightened value of literacy, while a Deconstructionist asks if
the syllables actually spelled the word sparkles.
Literary theory consists of questions: What does class conflict have to do
with the text? Does the Lacanian mirror stage of development really play a
role in the text? How much do the reader and the type of reader influence the
interpretation of the text? Is the text an entity in itself? Do the author's inten
tions matter when attempting to extract the meaning of a text? Each of these
questions and still others appropriate to textual interpretation represent
diverse perspectives for approaching a text. T3ut which questions can work
together? And from where do such questions come?
Unavoidably and necessarily, the art of literature has incurred numerous
schools of criticism that continue to grow and m ultiply w here m ore and
more questions are asked by still more theorists. Charles Bressler's fifth edi
tion of Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice offers an in-
depth understanding of these major schools of criticism in this ever-evolving
field. For a person having no experience in the literary field, Literary Criticism
presents the ubiquitous and sometimes difficult terminology of the various
schools of criticism and explains the use of terms, concepts, and ph iloso
phies in ways that the beginning critic is able to understand and appreciate.
For the experienced critic, on the other hand, Bressler s Literary Criticism
recognizes new theorists and critical term inology for each theoretical ap
proach and discusses each of the schools in ways that will better a scholar s
previous com prehension. O f p articu lar interest to the veteran scholar,
Bressler's text now includes four new chapters and up-to-date, detailed revi
sions of all chapters devoted to individual schools of criticism.
xi
Foreword
Bressler begins his text with a chapter defining

criticism, followed by a chapter that surveys critical history from Plato
fourth century BCE to Mikhail Bakhtin in the twentieth century CE A(t
forming a foundation for literary theory, Bressler then focuses each s u b *
quent chapter on a major school of criticism, arranging them in order of their
chronological births. Accordingly, each chapter is subdivided into the major
theorists, their philosophies, and terminology derived from the primary and
secondary texts.
This fifth edition of Literary Criticism also contains revised and updated
chapters on Russian Formalism and New Criticism , Reader-oriented
Criticism, Modernity and Postmodernism (Structuralism and Deconstruction),
Psychoanalytic Criticism, Feminism, M arxism , and Cultural P oetics and
New Historicism.
Som e of the m ost exciting additions to this n ew ed ition are the separate
ch ap ters on P ostcolonialism , A frica n -A m erica n C ritic ism , Q u eer Theory,
and Ecocriticism. To date, this is the only in trod u ctory text to literary criti
cism that contains a separate chapter d ev oted to E co criticism , presenting
quintessential background inform ation to the risin g th eory as w ell as key
questions posited by many ecocritics.
In addition to the theoretical m aterial, B ressler u ses N athan iel
H aw thorne's short story "Young Goodm an B row n " to illu strate how to use
literary theory to interpret a text. To apply each theoretical stance to other
texts, Bressler also provides a list of questions from that ch a p ter's theoretical
perspective to highlight the theory's concepts on a practical level.
Also new to this fifth edition are five scholarly essays on litera ry theory
and criticism that appear in the R eadings sectio n a t the b ack o f the text.
Included in this section are foundational essays by su ch c ritic s as nth
Brooks and Jacques Derrida.
Over the past fifteen years, Bressler's text has risen to one o f the best
selling introductory texts for literary criticism in the United States. Students
and teachers alike have discovered B ressle r's d eep y e t u n d e rsta n d a b le
approach to the many abstract and difficult theoretical con cepts o f literary
a.so an approachable source for apply.ng theory to text ^
A. R hone
Indiana University o f Pennsylvania
Indiana, PA
To the Reader
Like the first four editions, this new edition of Literary Criticism is designed
as a supp em ental text for introductory courses in literature, literary criticism,
an ot er courses in the hum anities, be they undergraduate or graduate. In
all five e itions, the purpose of this text has remained the same: to enable
students to approach literature from a variety of practical and theoretical
p ersp ectives and to equip them w ith a theoretical and a practical u nder
standing of how critics develop their interpretations. The book's overall aim
is to take the m ystery out of working with and interpreting texts. My hope is
that this particular text will allow students to join in the conversations taking
place at the various literary tables around the world.
As in the four previous editions, this fifth edition holds to several key
premises. First, I assum e that there is no such thing as an "innocent" reading
of a text. W hether our responses to texts are emotional and spontaneous or
well reasoned and highly structured, all our interpretations are rooted in un
derlying factors that cause us to respond in a particular way to a particular
text. W hat elicits these responses and how a reader makes sense of a text are
what really matters. Know ing literary theory allows us to analyze both our
initial and all further responses to any text and to question our beliefs, our
values, our feelings, and eventually our overall interpretation of a text at
hand. To understand why we respond to texts in certain ways, we m ust first
understand literary theory and its practical application, literary criticism.
Second, because our responses to texts have theoretical bases, I believe
that all readers have a literary theory. Consciously or unconsciously, we, as
readers, have developed a m indset that provides us with certain expecta
tions when reading various kinds of texts. Somehow we usually make sense
of any text we are reading. The methods we use to frame both our private
(personal) and our public interpretations involve us directly in literary the
ory and criticism , au tom atically m aking us practicing literary critics,
whether we know it or not.
My third prem ise rests on the observation that each read er's literary
theory and accom p an yin g m ethodology (i.e., literary criticism ) is either
conscious or unconscious, m ost nearly complete or incomplete, inform ed or
ill-inform ed, unified or eclectic. Because an unconscious, incom plete, ill-
informed, and eclectic literary theory more frequently than not leads to illog
ical, unsound, and haphazard interpretations, I believe that a well-defined,
logical, and clearly articulated literary theory will enable readers to develop
their own m ethods of interpreting texts their personal hermeneutics and
xiii
xiv To the Reader
help them as readers to order, clarify, and justify their appraisals of any text
in a consistent manner.
Unfortunately many readers cannot articulate their own literary theory
and have little or no knowledge of the history and development of the ever-
evolving principles of literary criticism. The goal of this text is to introduce
such students and readers to literary theory and criticism, to its historical de
velopment, and to the various theoretical positions or schools of criticism
that will enable them as readers to make conscious, inform ed, and well-
thought-out choices about their own methods of interpretation.
But why a new edition? Like many other academic studies, literary criti
cism is an ever-developing discipline. Since the fourth edition of this text,
much creative scholarship in literary theory and criticism has been written,
published, and debated. This new edition highlights many of these concerns
developed by literary theorists and allows you, the reader, to participate in
the cutting-edge discussions taking place in such areas as cultural poetics,
cultural studies, postcolonialism, African-American criticism, queer theory,
and ecocriticism. In addition, this fifth edition includes new critical terms
that will help readers understand more fully the various concepts being dis
cussed by the advocates of the different schools of literary criticism.
Like its predecessors, this new edition introduces students to the basic
concerns of literary theory in Chapter 1, which now includes a more detailed
discussion of the nature and concerns of theory and criticism. Chapter 2
places literary theory and criticism in historical perspective, beginning with
the writings of Plato and ending with one of the giants of literary criticism of
the twentieth century, Mikhail Bakhtin. Chapters 3 through 9 have been re
vised, adding new terminology where appropriate. Each of these chapters
presents the major schools of criticism that have been developed and con
tinue to develop in the twenty-first century: Russian Formalism, New
Criticism, Reader-oriented Criticism , Structuralism , Deconstruction,
Psychoanalytic Criticism, Feminism, Marxism, New Historicism or Cultural
Poetics, and Cultural Studies. In the fourth edition, Chapter 10 covered three
schools of criticism. In this new edition, each of these schools has its own
chapter: Chapter 10 details Postcolonialism; Chapter 11, African-American
Criticism; and Chapter 12, Queer Theory. In addition, a new chapter has
been added that highlights one of the most recent and ever-developing theo
ries, Ecocriticism, found in Chapter 13.
To maintain consistency and for ease of study, each of the chapters is
identically organized. We begin with a brief Introductory Section that is fol
lowed by the Historical Development of each school of criticism. The
Assumptions Section, which sets forth the philosophical principles on which
each school of criticism is based, then follows. Next comes the Methodology
Section, which serves as a how-to manual for explaining the techniques used
by the various schools of criticism to formulate their interpretations of texts
based on their philosophical assumptions.
To the Reader xv
After the Methodology Section, a newly revised Questions for Analysis

Section appears in Chapters 3 through 13. This feature provides students
vvit i ey ll l*^s ll)lls of a text in order to view that text from the per-
spectiveo it sc oo o criticism under discussion. Some of the questions
also as s ut cuts to apply their newfound knowledge to Nathaniel
Hawthorne s short story "Young Goodman Brown," a copy of which can be
found at the back of the book. Following this section in Chapters 3 through 13,
I have inc ut t a Critiques and Responses passage that explains the key
concepts of each school of criticism. Included in this section are concerns
raised by other schools of criticism that do not necessarily agree with the
assumptions of the school under discussion. By adding and updating this
section to each chapter, you, the reader, will be better able to join in the
discussions and debates concerning which theories and practices you will
ultimately use in your interpretive methodology.
All chapters in this new edition have undergone careful revision and
editing. In every chapter key terms appear in boldface type and are included
in the updated glossary that appears at the back of the book. Because Literary
Criticism is an introductory text, the explanations of the various schools of
criticism should be viewed not as exhaustive, but as a first step toward de
veloping an understanding of some rather difficult and at times provocative
concepts, principles, and methodologies for textual analysis.
Toward the end of the text, readers will discover a new section:
Readings on Literary Criticism . Included in this section are five primary
scholarly essays that highlight different schools of criticism. For example,
readers will find Jacques Derrida's essay "Structure, Sign, and Play in the
Discourse of the Human Sciences" that launched deconstruction theory in
America. By including these essays, readers will now have direct access to
scholarly works that have helped shape literary theory and criticism, both
historically and at the present time.
A CKN O W LED GM EN TS
Because I believe in the intertextuality of texts, I readily acknowledge that

the creation of this text and its previous editions involves an intricate web of
relationships with many people. First, to those students who enrolled in my
literary criticism classes, I say a huge thank you. Your thoughtful questions,
class presentations and discussions, and seemingly countless essays have all
helped me clarify my thinking about many com plex theoretical issues.
Without you, this book could not have been written.
I am also deeply grateful to Indiana Wesleyan University. By awarding
me a Hines Fellowship, the university provided me with released time from
teaching for the researching and writing of this text. In particular, special
/
xvi To the Reader
thanks must go to Dr. Jerry Pattengnle, Assistant Provost for Scholarship and
Public Engagement; Dr. Mary Brown, Chair of the Department of Modern
Languages and Literature; and Dr. David Riggs, Executive Director for the
John Wesley Honors College for their encouragement and oftentimes daily
support. In addition, my colleagues at the John Wesley Honors CollegeMs
Sara Scheunemann, Dr. Rusty Hawkins, Dr. Lisa Toland, and Dr. Todd
Reamhave all cheered me along the way as I authored this text. Special
mention must also be made of Luke L. Nelsen, a John Wesley Honors student
for his helpful editing, and to Dr. Jason Runyan and Professor Timothy Esh
for their frequent and much needed words of encouragement, coffee times,
and lunches. And special thanks goes to my friend and colleague Zachary A.
Rhone, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, for his careful reading of the
manuscript and his enlightening suggestions.
Words of great praise have been earned by my faithful and bold editor at
Pearson, Vivian Garcia, and to her editorial assistant, Heather Vomero. Their
necessary prodding to keep on schedule, their kind words, and their shep
herding of this new edition through all its various stages of production are
extremely appreciated. Also, I wish to thank the following scholars for their
thoughtful and insightful comments during the development of the fifth edi
tion: Quentin Bailey, San Diego State University; Steven J. Gores, Northern
Kentucky University; Tamara F. O'Callaghan, Northern Kentucky
University; Dr. Christine Marie Neufeld, Eastern Michigan University;
Dr. Brian Whaley, Utah Valley University; and Zak Sitter, Xavier University.
Most of all, I want to express my undying gratitude, appreciation, and
love for my best friend, my favorite vice president and academic dean, and
my wife, Darlene G. Bressler. You are indeed my joy, my life's companion,
and my best and most beloved critic. Thank you for your patience and sup
port during all the various stages of this project. And to the apple of my eye,
my daughter, Heidi Elizabeth Bressler, I say thank you, and I love you. How
proud I am of you, and what great joy you bring me because you are you!
Your many encouraging words helped keep me on track throughout the
writing of this book.
Without the help and encouragement of my thoughtful and gifted stu
dents of the John Wesley Honors College, my colleagues, my friends, and my
family, this book could not have been written. Any errors in this edition,
however, are solely mine.
Charles E. Bressler
Indiana Wesleyan University
Marion, Indiana
1
Defining Criticism, Theory,
and Literature
Criticism should be a casual conversation.
W. H. Auden, The Table Talk ofW. H. Auden
L IS T E N IN G T O A C O N V E R S A T IO N
magine for a moment that you are sitting at the food court of a local shop
I ping mall. Your seat is front and center, the chair located closest to the
mall's walkway where all the shoppers have to pass you by as they continue
seeking out those bargains while chatting with their friends. Sipping on your
energy-boosting fruit drink, you begin reading your copy of the local news
paper. As you read, you cannot help but overhear a conversation between a
middle-aged woman and her teenage son as they stop in front of you:
"M om , can I have five dollars to go to the arcade while you shop for
shoes for your dinner party next week?"
"No! I want you to come with me to the store to help me pick out my
new shoes. I w ant to buy som ething a little daring, and I need your
support."
"But, Mom, what do I know about shoes for you? I promised to meet
some of my friends at the arcade around noon, and it is already 12:49!"
"Tim, I really want you to come, but if you want to go to the arcade, just
go. Here's the money."
As you look up, the smiling teen grabs the bills from his m other's hand
and saunters cockily to the arcade. As his mom is w alking away w ith a
somewhat saddened look on her face, you wonder how she is feeling. Is she
disappointed? Angry? Hurt? Did she really expect her son to join her as she
tried on pair after pair of shoes? Should she even have asked him to go with
her in the first place? And what about Tim? Is he a spoiled brat? Does he
hold a part-time job after school? Is he an only child, or is he the first or the
1
2 Chapter 1 Defining Criticism, Theory, and Literature
last bom of many? These and similar questions keep popping into your head
as you watch both mother and son separate and travel in opposite directions.
By listening to this parent-child conversation, you became, in a real
sense, a part of it. For a moment the concerns of the two participants became
part of your world. You looked at them, evaluated their social positions,
thought about their feelings, and conjectured about the social structure of
their family. And even your personal feelings were temporarily affected, for
you observed that as Tim walked away, a saddened look appeared on his
mother's face. The conversation being over, you then returned to your read
ing of the newspaper. Briefly, however, you became an observer of this
mother and son's story. As if they were in a story, you "read" not only what
was said, but what was left unsaid, for you imagined their feelings, their de
sires, and the results of their interaction. You filled in the gaps about their
characters while simultaneously developing them not as they really were,
but as you personally imagined them to be. Being an outsider, you quickly
became a participant in the actions of their tale, asking questions about the
nature of the characters, the events of their story, and their and your emo
tional responses to the story line. Although you were not literally reading a
text, you asked the same kinds of questions that a literary critic asks when
reading a work of fiction. Like a literary critic, you became an evaluator; an
interpreter; and for a moment, a participant in the story itself.
As you overheard the voices of the two characters the mother and
sonin their story, similarly literary critics eavesdrop on the multiple con
versations in literary works. To help them articulate and analyze their eaves
dropping, critics assign names to the various elements of the multiple con
versations of which they become a part: author, reader, narrator, narratee,
and so forth. One such critic, the Russian writer, essayist, and literary theo
rist Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975) coined the term dialogic heteroglossia
("many voices in multiple conversations") to explain the various conversa
tions occurring in one such literary genre, the novel. All genres, however,
have developed such technical vocabulary to explain not only their con
stituent elements but also avenues to discovering their meanings.
Let us now eavesdrop on another conversation taking place about a
short storv.
j
EAVESDROPPING ON A LITERATURE C LA SSR O O M
Having assigned her literature class Flannery O'Connor's short story "A
Good Man Is Hard to Find" and knowing O'Connor's canon and her long
list of curious protagonists, Dr. Lisa Toland could not anticipate whether her
students would greet her with excitement, silence, bewilderment, or frustra
tion when asked to discuss this short story. Her curiosity would soon be
C luiptrr 1 Debiting Theory, dnd Literature 3
satisfied, tor as she stood before tlit* ('lass, she asked a seem ingly sim ple,
diivct question: W hat do you believe O 'C onnor is trying to tell us in this
story ? In other w ords, how do you, as readers, interpret this text?"
Although som e students stared out the w indow while others suddenly
found the covers of their anthologies fascinating, a few raised their hands.
Given a nod from Dr. Toland, Alice w as the first to respond. "I believe
O 'Connor is trying to tell us the state of the family in rural Georgia during
the 1950s. Just look at how the children, June Star and John Wesley, behave.
They don't respect their grandm other. In fact, they mock her."
"B u t she d eserv es to be m o ck ed ," interru pted Peter. "H e r life is one big
act. She w an ts to act lik e a lad y to w ear w hite co tto n gloves and carry a
p u rse b u t sh e really ca re s o n ly for h erself. She is se lfish , se lf-ce n te re d ,
and arro g a n t."
"T h a t m ay b e ," resp o n d ed K aren, "b u t I th in k the real m essa g e o f
O 'C o n n o r's story is not about fam ily or one particular character, bu t abou t a
philosophy of life. O 'C o n n o r uses the M isfit to articulate her personal view
of life. W h en the M isfit say s Jesu s h as throw n 'e v ery th in g o ff b a la n c e ,'
O 'C onnor is really asking each of her readers either to choose his or her ow n
way of life or to follow the teachings of Jesus. In effect, O 'C o n n o r is sayin g
we all have a choice: to live for ourselves or to live for and through o th ers."
"I d on't think w e should bring Christianity or any other religion into the
story," said George. "B y analyzing O 'C o n n o r's individual w ords w ords like
tall, dark, and deep and noting how often she repeats them and in w hat con
text, w e can deduce that O 'C o n n o r's text, not O 'C onnor herself or her view of
life, is m elancholy and a bit dark. But to equate O 'C o n n o r's personal ph iloso
phy about life w ith the m eaning of this particular story is som ew hat silly."
"B u t w e can 't forget that O 'C onnor is a w om an," said Betty, "an d an ed
ucated one at that! H er story has little to do w ith an academ ic or p ie-in-th e-
sky, m ean in g less p h ilo so p h ica l d iscu ssion , bu t a lo t to do w ith b e in g a
woman. Being raised in the South, O 'C onnor w ould know and w ould have
exp erien ced p reju d ice becau se she is fem ale. A nd as w e all know , the
Southern m ale's opinion of women is that they are to be kept 'barefoot, p reg
nant, and in the kitchen,' and to be as nondescript as B ailey's w ife is in this
story. U n like all the o th er ch aracters, w e d o n 't even know this w o m a n 's
nam e. H ow m u ch m ore n o n u escrip tiv e could O 'C o n n o r b e? O 'C o n n o r 's
message is sim ple: W omen are oppressed and suppressed. If they open their
mouths, if they have an opinion, and if they voice that opinion, they w ill end
up like the grandm other, with a bullet in their head ."
"I don't think that's her point at a ll," said Barb. "I do agree that she is
w riting from p erso n al exp erien ce abou t the Sou th, bu t h er m ain p o in t is
about prejudice itself preju d ice against A frican A m ericans. T h ro u g h the
voice of the gran d m other, w e see the Sou thern la d y 's o p in io n o f A frican
Am ericans: T h ey are in ferio r to w hites, u n ed u cated , poor, and b a sica lly
ignorant. O 'C o n n o r's m ain point is that we are all eq u al."
"Yes, I agree," said Mike. "But if we look at this story in the context of all
the other stories we have read this semester, I see a theme we have often
discussed: appearance versus reality. This is O 'C onnor's main point. The
grandmother acts like a lady someone who cares about others__but
inwardly she cares only for herself. Basically, she's a hypocrite."
"I disagree. In fact, I disagree with everybody," shouted Daniel. "I ljj<e
the grandmother. She reminds me of my grandmother. O'Connor's grand
mother is a bit self-centered, but whose old grandm other isn't? Like my
grandma, O'Connor's grandmother likes to be around her grandchildren, to
read and to play with them. She's funny and she has spunk. And she even
likes cats."
"But, Dr. Toland, can we ever know what Flannery O'Connor really
thinks about this story?" asked Jessica. "After all, she's dead, and she didn't
write an essay telling us what the story actually means. And since she never
tells us its meaning, can't the story have more than one meaning?"
Dr. Toland instantly realized that Jessica's queryCan a story have mul
tiple meanings? is a pivotal question not only for English professors and
their students but also for anyone who reads any text.
C A N A T E X T HAVE M O R E T H A N O N E IN TER PR ET A TIO N ?
A quick glance at the discussion of O'Connor's "A Good Man Is Hard to Find"
in Dr. Toland's classroom reveals that not all readers interpret texts in the same
way. In fact, all of the eight students who voiced their understandings of the
story gave fundamentally different interpretations. Was only one of these
eight interpretations correct and the remaining seven wrong? If so, how can
one arrive at the correct interpretation? Put another way, if there is only one
correct interpretation of a text, what are the hermeneutical principles (the
rules of interpretation) readers must use to discover this interpretation?
Should each of the eight students attempt to reconstruct the intentions
O'Connor held while writing her story or the meaning her story had for her
readers in the 1950s (hermeneutics of recovery)? Or should each student
attempt to examine O'Connor's unspoken but implied assumptions con
cerning politics, sexuality, religion, linguistics, and a host of other topics
(hermeneutics of suspicion)? By so doing, O'Connor's work can then have
multiple interpretations. Are all of these various and often contradictory inter
pretations valid? Can and should each interpretation be considered a satisfac
tory and legitimate analysis of the text? In other words, can a text mean
anything a reader declares it to mean, or are there guiding principles for inter
preting a text that must be followed if a reader is to arrive at a valid interpreta
tion? And who can declare that one's interpretation is valid or legitimate?
English professors? Professional critics? Published scholars? Any reader?
Chapter 1 Defining Criticism, Theory, and Literature 5
Need a reader, however, be thinking of any of these particulars when

reading a text? Can t one simply enjoy a novel without considering its inter
pretation? Need one be able to state the work's theme, discuss its structure,
or analyze its tone to enjoy the actual act of reading the work itself?
These and similar questions are the domain of literary criticism: the act
of studying, analyzing, interpreting, evaluating, and enjoying a work of art.
At first glance, the study of literary criticism may appear daunting and for
midable. Jargon such as hermeneutics, Aristotelian poetics, metaphysics of
presence, deconstruction, and many other intimidating terms confront the
would-be literary critic. Nevertheless, the actual process or act of literary
criticism is not as ominous as it may first appear.
HOW TO BECO M E A LITERARY CRITIC
When the students in Dr. Toland's class were discussing O'Connor's short
story "A Good Man Is Hard to Find," each of them was directly responding
to the instructor's initial question: What do you believe O'Connor is trying
to tell us in and through this story? Although not all responses were radi
cally different, each student viewed the story from a unique perspective. For
example, some students expressed a liking for the grandmother, but others
thought her a selfish, arrogant woman. Still others believed O'Connor was
voicing a variety of philosophical, social, and cultural concerns, such as the
place of women and African Americans in Southern society, or adherence to
tenets of Christianity as the foundation for one's view of life, or the structure
of the family in rural Georgia in the 1950s. All had an opinion about and,
therefore, an interpretation of O'Connor's short story.
When Dr. Toland's students stated their personal interpretations of
O'Connor's text, they had become practicing literary critics. All of them
had already interacted with the story, thinking about their likes and dis
likes of the various characters; their impressions of the setting, plot, and
structure; and their overall assessment of the story itself, whether that as
sessment was a full-fledged interpretation that seeks to explain every facet
of the text or simply bewilderment as to the story's overall meaning. None
of the students, however, had had formal training in literary criticism.
None knew the somewhat complicated jargon (discourse) of literary theory.
And none were acquainted with any of the formal and informal schools of
literary criticism.
What each student had done was to have read the story. The reading
process itself produced within the students an array of responses, taking the
form of questions, statements, opinions, and feelings evoked by the text. It is
these responses coupled with the text itself that are the concerns of literary
criticism and theory.
Although these students may need to master the terminology, the m

philosophical approaches, and the diverse m ethodologies of formal litc ^
criticism to become trained literary critics, they automatically became ^
ary critics as they read and thought about O 'C onnor's text. They needed ***
formal training in literary criticism or working understanding of literary tg10
ory. By mastering the concepts of formal literary criticism and theory ho
ever, these students, like all readers, can becom e critical readers who W*
better able to understand and articulate their own reactions and anal ^
those of others to any given text. ^ e
W H A T IS LIT E R A R Y C R IT IC IS M ?
Matthew Arnold, a nineteenth-century literary critic, describes literary criti

cism as "A disinterested endeavor to learn and propagate the best that is
known and thought in the world." Implicit in this definition is that literary
criticism is a disciplined activity that attempts to describe, study, analyze,
justify, interpret, and evaluate a work of art. By necessity, Arnold would
argue, this discipline attempts to formulate aesthetic and methodological
principles on which the critic can evaluate a text. Anyone who attempts to
evaluate texts in this fashion is a literary critic, a term derived from two
Greek words, krino, meaning "to judge" and krites, meaning "a judge or jury
person." A literary critic, or kritikos, is, therefore, a "judge of literature." The
first recorded such judge is the fourth century BCE teacher Philitas, who
arrived in Alexandria in 305 BCE to tutor a child who would become King
Ptolemy II.When judging literature, Philitas was actively engaged in the dis
ciplined activities of literary criticism.
When we consider its function and its relationship to texts, literary criti
cism is not usually considered a discipline in and of itself, for it must be
related to something else that is, a work of art. Without the work of art, the
activity of criticism cannot exist. And it is through this discerning activity of
criticism that we can knowingly and deliberately explore the questions that
help define our humanity, critique our culture, evaluate our actions and feel
ings, or simply increase our appreciation and enjoyment of both a literary
work and our fellow human beings.
When analyzing a text, literary critics ask basic questions such as these
about the philosophical, psychological, functional, and descriptive nature of
the text itself:
Does a text have only one correct meaning?

Is a text always didactic; that is, must a reader learn something from every text?
Can a text be read only for enjoyment?
Does a text affect each reader in the same way?
C h a p te r 1 D efining C riticism , Theory, and L iteratu re 7
How is a text influenced by the culture of its author and the culture in which it is
written?
What part or function does gender play in the writing or the reading of a text?
How do our personal feelings affect our interpretation of a text?
Can a text become a catalyst for change in a given culture?
Since the tim e of the G reek philosophers Plato and Aristotle and continuing
to the present day, critics and readers have been hotly debating the answ ers
to these and sim ilar questions. By asking questions of O 'C o n n o r's or any
other text and by contem plating answ ers, we, too, can participate in this on
going conversation. We can question, for exam ple, the gran d m other's m o
tives in O C onnor s A Good M an Is Hard to Find" for w anting to take her
cat on the fam ily s vacation. Or we can ask if the presence of the M isfit and
his co m p an io n s is the p rim ary reason the grandm other exp erien ces h er
epiphany. N o m atter w hat question we m ay ask concerning O 'C o n n o r's
text, we are participating in the ongoing debate of the value and enjoym ent
of O C onnor s short story w hile sim ultaneously engaging in literary criti
cism and functioning as practical literary critics.
Traditionally, literary critics involve themselves in either theoretical or
practical criticism . Theoretical criticism formulates the theories, principles,
and tenets of the nature and value of art. By citing general aesthetic and
m oral principles of art, theoretical criticism provides the necessary fram e
work for practical criticism . Practical criticism (also known as applied criti
cism) applies the theories and tenets of theoretical criticism to a particular
work. Using the theories and principles of theoretical criticism, the practical
critic defines the standards of taste and explains, evaluates, or justifies a par
ticular piece of literature. A further distinction is made betw een the practical
critic who posits that there is only one theory or set of principles a critic m ay
use w hen evalu atin g a literary w ork the absolutist critic and the
relativistic critic, one who uses various and even contradictory theories in
critiquing a text. The basis for either kind of critic, or any form of criticism , is
literary theory. W ithout theory, practical criticism could not exist.
W H A T IS L IT E R A R Y T H E O R Y ?
When reading O 'C o n n o r's "A Good Man Is Hard to Find," we necessarily
interact w ith the text, asking m any specific, text-related questions and,
oftentim es, rather personal ones as well. For exam ple, such questions as
these may concern us, the readers:
What kind of person is the grandmother? Is she like my grandmother or any

grandmother I know?
What is the function or role of June Star? John Wesley? Bailey? The children's
mother?
Why was the grandmother taking Pitty Sing, the cat, on the family vacation?
What is the significance of the restaurant scene at The Tower?
Right before she is shot, what does the grandmother recognize about the Misfit?
What is the significance of this recognition?
Such questions immediately involve us in practical criticism. What we tend

to forget during the reading of O'Connor's short story or any other text is
that we have already read other literary works (intertextuality). Our re
sponse to any textor the principles of practical criticism we apply to itis
largely a conditioned or socially constructed one; that is, how we arrive at
meaning in fiction is, in part, determined by our experiences. Consciously or
unconsciously, we have developed a mind-set or framework that accommo
dates our expectations when reading a novel, short story, poem, or any other
type of literature. In addition, what we choose to value or uphold as good or
bad, moral or immoral, beautiful or ugly within a given text actually de
pends on this ever-evolving framework. When we can clearly articulate our
personal philosophical framework when reading a text and explain how this
mind-set directly influences our values and aesthetic judgments about a text,
we are well on our way to developing a coherent, unified literary theory
the assumptions (conscious or unconscious) that undergird our understand
ing and interpretation of language, the ways vve construct meaning, and our
understanding of art, culture, aesthetics, and ideologies. Whereas literary
criticism involves our analysis of a text, literary theory concerns itself with
our understanding of the ideas, concepts, and intellectual assumptions upon
which rests our actual literary critique.
Because anyone who responds to a text is already a practicing literary
critic and because practical criticism is rooted in the reader's preconditioned
expectations (his or her mind-set) when actually reading a text, every reader
espouses some kind of literary theory. Each reader's theory may be con
scious or unconscious, whole or partial, informed or ill informed, eclectic or
unified. An incomplete, unconscious, and therefore, unclear literary theory
more frequently than not leads to illogical, unsound, and haphazard inter
pretations. On the other hand, a well-defined, logical, and clearly articulated
theory enables readers to develop a method by which to establish principles
that enable them to justify, order, and clarify their own appraisals of a text in
a consistent manner.
A better understanding of literary theory can be gained by investigating
the etymology of the word theory itself. Derived from the Greek word
theoria, the word theory means a "view or perspective of the Greek stage.
iterary theory, then, offers to us a view of life, an understanding of why we
interpret texts the way we do. Consider the various places in the theater that
we, t e audience, may sit. Depending on our seatswhether close to the
F ti r 1 Defining Criticism, Theory, and Literature
view
will
sitting'
r, . . _. exactly is influencing us during the reading
. Ur CU UIY *s ** our understanding of the nature of literature
1 * Ur P 1 lca ' rel*gious, or social view s? Is it our fam ily back-
groun . icse an sim ilar questions (and their answers) will directly and
indirectly and consciously and unconsciously be affecting our interpretation
an our enjoym ent, or lack thereof, of a text. To be able to articulate such un
derlying assum ptions about how we read texts will enable us, the readers, to
establish for ourselves a lucid and logical practical criticism.
A w ell-articulated literary theory also assumes that an innocent reading
of a text or a sheerly emotional or spontaneous reaction to a work does not
exist because literary theory questions the assumptions, beliefs, and feelings
of readers, asking why they respond to a text in a certain way. In a very real
sense, literary theory causes us to question our commonsense interpretation
of a text, asking us to probe beneath our initial responses. According to a
consistent literary theory, a simple emotional or intuitive response to a text
does not explain the underlying factors that caused such a reaction. What
elicits that response, or how the reader constructs meaning through or with
the text, is w hat matters.
M A K IN G M E A N IN G F R O M T E X T
How we as readers construct meaning through or with a text depends on the

mental fram ew ork each of us has developed and continues to develop con
cerning the nature of reality. This framework or worldview consists of the
assumptions or presuppositions that we all hold (either consciously or un
consciously) about the basic m akeup of our world. For exam ple, w e all
struggle to find answers to such questions as these:
What is the basis of morality or ethics?

What is the meaning of human history?
What happens at the moment of death?
Is there an overarching purpose for humanity s existence?
What is beauty? Truth? Goodness?
Is there an ultimate reality?
Interestingly our answ ers to these and other questions do not remain static,
for as we interact with other people, our environment, our culture, and our
own inner selves, we are continually shaping and developing our personal
philosophies, rejecting former ideas and replacing them w.th newly discovered
ones. It is our dynamic answersincluding our doubts and fears about th

answersthat largely determine our response to a literary text. ese
Upon such a conceptual framework rests literary theory. Whether th
framework is well reasoned or simply a matter of habit and past teachin **
readers respond to works of art via their worldview. From this philosophic ^
core of beliefs spring their evaluations of the goodness, worthiness, and
value of art itself. Using their worldviews either consciously or uncon
sciously as a yardstick by which to measure and value their experiences
readers respond to individual works of literature, ordering and valuing each
separate or collective experience in each text based on the system of beliefs
housed in their worldviews.
THE R EA D IN G P R O C E SS AN D LITERA R Y TH EO R Y
The relationship between literary theory and a reader's personal worldview

is best illustrated in the act of reading itself. When reading, we are constantly
interacting with the text. According to Louise M. Rosenblatt's text The Reader,
the Text, the Poem (1978), during the act or event of reading,
A reader brings to the text his or her past experience and present personality.
Under the magnetism of the ordered symbols of the text, the reader marshals
his or her resources and crystallizes out from the stuff of memory, thought, and
feeling a new order, a new experience, which he/she sees as the poem. This be
comes part of the ongoing stream of the reader's life experience, to be reflected
on from any angle important to him or her as a human being.
Rosenblatt declares that the relationship between the reader and the text is
not linear, but transactional; that is, it is a process or event that takes place at
a particular time and place in which the text and the reader condition each
other. The reader and the text transactnot simply interactcreating mean
ing, for meaning does not exist solely within the reader's mind or within the
text, Rosenblatt maintains, but in the transaction between them. To arrive at
an interpretation of a text (what Rosenblatt calls the poem), readers bring
their own "temperament and fund of past transactions to the text [what
some critics call forestructure] and live through a process of handling new
situations, new attitudes, new personalities, [and] new conflicts in value.
They can reject, revise, or assimilate into the resource with which they en
gage their world. Through this transactional experience, readers con
sciously and unconsciously amend their worldviews.
Because no literary theory can account for all the various factors in-
eluded in everyone s conceptual framework, and because we as readers all
have different literary experiences, there can exist no metatheoiyno single
overarching literary theory that encompasses all possible interpretations of a
l
text suggested by its readers. And there can be no single correct literary the
ory, for in and of itself, each literary theory asks valid questions of and about
a text, and no one theory is capable of exhausting all legitimate questions to
be asked about any text.
The valid and legitimate questions asked about a text by the various lit
erary theories differ, often widely. Espousing separate critical orientations,
each theory focuses primarily on one element of the interpretative process,
although in practice different theories may address several areas of concern
in interpreting a text. For example, one theory may stress the work itself, be
lieving that the text alone contains all the necessary information to arrive at
an interpretation. This theory isolates the text from its historical or sociolog
ical setting and concentrates on the literary forms found in the text, such as
figures of speech (tropes), word choice (diction), and style. Another theory
may attempt to place a text in its historical, political, sociological, religious,
and economic settings. By placing the text in historical perspective, this the
ory asserts that its adherents can arrive at an interpretation that both the
text's author and its original audience would support. Still another theory
may direct its chief concern toward the text's audience. It asks how readers7
emotions and personal backgrounds affect each reader's interpretation of a
particular text. Whether the primary focus is psychological, linguistic, myth
ical, historical, or from any other critical orientation, each literary theory es
tablishes its own theoretical basis, then proceeds to develop its own method
ology whereby readers can apply the particular theory to an actual text. In
effect, each literary theory or perspective is like taking a different seat in the
theater and thereby obtaining a different view of the stage. Different literary
theories and theorists may all study the same text, but being in different
seats, the various literary theorists will all respond differently to the text or
the performance on the stagebecause of their unique perspectives.
Although each reader's theory and methodology for arriving at a text's
interpretation may differ, sooner or later groups of readers and critics de
clare allegiance to a similar core of beliefs and band together, founding
schools of criticism. For example, critics who believe that social and histori
cal concerns must be highlighted in a text are known as M arxist critics,
whereas reader-oriented critics (sometimes referred to as reader-response
critics) concentrate on readers' personal reactions to the text. Because new
points of view concerning literary works are continually evolving, new
schools of criticismand, therefore, new literary theories will continue to
develop. One of the more recent schools to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s,
New Historicism or Cultural Poetics, declares that a text must be analyzed
through historical research that assumes that history and fiction are insepa
rable. The members of this school, known as New Historicists, hope to shift
the boundaries between history and literature and thereby produce criticism
that reflects what they believe to be the proper relationship between the text
and its historical context. Still other newly evolving schools of criticism, such
as postcolonialism, African American studies, gender studies, queer theory

and ecocriticism, continue to emerge and challenge previous ways of think
ing about and critiquing texts.
Because the various schools of criticism (and the theories on which th >
are based) ask different questions about the same work of literature, these
theoretical schools provide an abundance of options from which readers can
choose to broaden their understanding not only of texts but also of their so
ciety, their culture, and their own humanity. By embracing literary theory
we learn about literature, but more important, we are also taught tolerance
for other people's beliefs. By rejecting or ignoring theory, we are in danger of
canonizing ourselves as literary saints who possess divine knowledge and
who can, therefore, supply the one and only correct interpretation for a
given text. When we oppose, disregard, or ignore literary theory, we are in
danger of blindly accepting our more frequently than not unquestioned prej
udices and assumptions. By embracing literary theory and literary criticism
(its practical application), we can willingly participate in that seemingly end
less historical conversation about the nature of humanity and of humanity's
concerns as expressed in literature. And in the process, we can begin to ques
tion our concepts of ourselves, our society, and our culture and how texts
themselves help define and continually redefine these concepts.
W H A T IS L IT E R A T U R E ?
Because literary criticism presupposes that there exists a work of literature to

be interpreted, we could assume that formulating a definition of literature
would be simple. This is, however, not the case. For centuries, writers, liter
ary historians, and others have debated about but have failed to agree on a
definition for this term. Some assume that literature is simply anything that
is w ritten, thereby declaring a city telephone directory, a cookbook, and a
road atlas to be literary works along with Pride and Prejudice and the
Adventures o f Huckleberry Finn. Derived from the Latin littera, meaning "let
ter," the root meaning of the word literature refers primarily to the written
word and seems to support this broad definition. Yet such a definition elimi
nates the im portant oral traditions upon which much of our literature is
based, including H om er's Iliad and Odyssey, the English epic Beoxvidf, and
many Native American legends, among many other examples.
To solve this difficulty, others choose to define literature as an art, thereby
leaving open the question of its being written or oral. This definition further
narrow s its m eaning, equating literature to works of the imagination or
creative writing. To emphasize the imaginative qualities of literature, some
critics choose to use the German word for literature, W ortkunst, instead of
its English equivalent, because Wortkunst autom atically implies that the
imaginative and creative aspects of literature are essential components of the

word literature itself. By this definition, written works such as a telephone
directory or a cookbook can no longer be considered literature; these kinds
of works are superseded by poetry, drama, fiction, and other imaginative
writing. Some scholars believe that the imaginative qualities of a work of lit
erature were first articulated for Western literature in a work written by the
French Baroness Madame de Stael, a German Romantic theorist, who in 1800
authored On Literature Considered in Its Relations with Social Institutions.
Although the narrowing of the definition of literature accomplished by
equating it to the defining terms of art seemingly simplifies what can and
cannot be considered a literary work, such is not the case. That the J. Crew
and Victoria's Secret clothes catalogues are imaginative (and colorful) writ
ing is unquestioned, but should they then be considered works of literature?
Who declares whether a written document is a work of art? Many readers as
sume that if an imaginative work of fiction is publishedbe it singly or in an
anthologysuch a work is worthy to be read. It has, after all, been judged
acceptable as a literary work and has been published and presumably ap
proved by an editorial board. This belief that published works are deemed
worthy to be dubbed literature is called the hyperprotected cooperative
principle, that is, published works have been evaluated and declared liter
ary texts by a group of well-informed people who are protecting the overall
canon of literature. But even this principle does not stop many from arguing
that some published works are unworthy to be called works of art or litera
ture. Specifying and narrowing the definition of literature to a "work of art"
does not, then, immediately provide consensus or a consistent rule about
how to declare a text a "work of literature."
Whether one accepts the broad or narrow definition, many argue that a
text must have certain peculiar qualities before it can be dubbed "literature."
Those who hold this view believe that an artist's creation or secondary world
often mirrors the author's primary world, the world in which the writer
lives and moves and breathes. Because reality or the primary world is highly
structured, the secondary world must also be so structured. To achieve this
structure, the artist must create plot, character, tone, symbols, conflict, and a
host of other elements or parts of the artistic story, with all of these elements
working in a dynamic relationship to produce a literary work. Some would
argue that it is the creation of these elementshow they are used and in
what context that determines whether a piece of writing is literature.
Still other critics add the "test of time" criterion to their essential compo
nents of literature. If a work such as Dante s Divine Comedy or La Dizuna
Commedia (1308-1321) withstands the passage of time and is still being read
centuries after its creation, it is deemed valuable and worthy to be called lit
erature. This criterion also denotes literature s functional or cultural value. If
people value a written work, for whatever reason, they often declare it to be
literature whether or not it contains the prescribed elements of a text.
14 Chapter 1 IVtining Criticism, Theory, and Literature.
What this work may contain is a peculiar aesthetic quality that is, some
element of beauty that distinguishes it as literature from other forms of
writing. Aesthetics, the branch of philosophy that deals with the concept of
the beautiful, strives to determine the criteria for beauty in a work of art.
Theorists such as Plato and Aristotle declare that the source of beauty is
inherent within the art object itself; other critics, such as David Hume, main
tain that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And some contemporary
theorists argue that one's perception of beauty in a text rests in the dynamic
relationship between the object (the text) and the perceiver (the reader) at a
given moment in time. Wherever the criteria for judging beauty of a work of
art finally resides, most critics agree that a work of literature does have an
appealing aesthetic quality.
W hile distinguishing literature from other forms of writing, this ap
pealing aesthetic quality directly contributes to literature s chief purpose:
telling a story. Although it may simultaneously communicate facts, litera
ture's primary aim is to tell a story. The subject of this story is particularly
hum an, describing and detailing a variety of human experiences, not stat
ing facts or bits and pieces of information. For example, literature does not
define the word courage but shows us a courageous character acting coura
geously. By so doing, literature concretizes an array of human values, emo
tions, actions, and ideas in story form. It is this concretization that allows
us to experience vicariously the stories of a host of characters. Through
these characters, we observe people in action, making decisions, struggling
to m aintain their humanity in often inhumane circumstances, and embody
ing for us a variety of values and human characteristics that we may em
brace, discard, enjoy, or detest.
L IT E R A R Y T H E O R Y A N D TH E D EFIN IT IO N O F LITER A TU R E
Is literature sim ply a story that contains certain aesthetic and literary qual
ities that all somehow pleasingly culminate in a work of art? If so, can texts
be considered artifacts that can be analyzed, dissected, and studied to dis
cover their essen tial nature or meaning? Or does a literary work have
ontological status; that is, does it exist in and of itself, perhaps in a special
n eo -P lato n ic realm ? Or must it have an audience, a reader, before it be
com es literature? And can we even define the word text? Is it simply print
on a page? If pictures are included, do they automatically become part of
the text? Who determ ines, then, when print becom es a work of art? The
reader? The author? Both?
The answers to these and sim ilar questions have been long debated,
and the various responses make up the corpus of literary theory. Literary
theory offers a variety of methodologies that enable readers to interpret a
Chapter 1 . Defining Crltlclwm, Theory, and U ,r0,ure
15
' from different and often conflicting pin( f view. By an doing it

asks pertinent and often controversial questions concerning the philosoph
ical assum ptions surrounding the nature of the reading process the
epistem ological nature of learning, the nature of reality itself, and a host of
related concerns. Such theorizing em powers readers to examine their per
sonal w orldview s, to articulate their individual assumptions about the na
ture of reality and to understand how these assum ptions directly affect
their interpretations not only of a work of art but also of the definition of
literature itself.
A lthough any d efin ition of literature is debatable, m ost would agree
that an exam ination of a text's total artistic situation would help us decide
what constitutes literature. This total picture of the w ork involves such ele
m ents as the w o rk itse lf (e.g ., an exam in atio n of the fictio n ality or sec
ondary w orld created w ithin the story), the artist, the universe or w orld
the w ork su p p osed ly rep resents, and the au d ience or readers. A lthough
readers and critics w ill em phasize one, two, or even three of these elem ents
while deem phasizing the others, such a consideration of a text's artistic sit
uation im m ed iately broadens the definition of literature from the concept
that it is sim ply a w ritten w ork that contains certain qualities to a d efini
tion that m ust include the dynam ic interrelationship of the actual text and
the readers. P erh ap s, then, the literary com petence of the readers th em
selves helps determ ine w hether a w ork should be considered literature. If
this is so, then a literary w ork m ay be m ore functional than ontological, its
existence and, therefore, its value being determ ined by its readers and not
by the w ork itself.
Overall, the definition of literature depends on the particular kind of lit
erary theory or school of criticism that the reader or critic espouses. For
Form alists, for exam ple, the text and text alone contains certain qualities
that m ake a p articu lar piece of w riting literature. On the other hand, for
reader-oriented critics, the interaction and psychological relationships be
tween the text and the reader help determine w hether a docum ent should be
deemed literary. A w orking know ledge of literary theory can thus help all
readers form u late their ever-developing definition of literature and w hat
they believe constitutes a literary work.
T H E F U N C T IO N O F L IT E R A T U R E A N D L IT E R A R Y T H E O R Y
Critics continually debate literature's chief function. Tracing their arguments

to Plato, m any contend that literature's primary function is moral, its chief
value being its usefulness for cultural or societal purposes. But others, like
Aristotle, hold that a w ork of art can be analyzed and broken down into its
various parts, w ith each part contributing to the overall enjoym ent of the
and Literature
i C'riticisn'i, Theory,
lb Chapter 1 lV fiiu n g
, i text is found within the tevr
work itself. For these fiTw oTk itself, m its m ost sim ple t o r ^ f
or is inseparably Imked to tnt .... ^, . literature
literatures schief
u ''^ * function
iuncllc' n to/ âch
th<->
we a'ad? #ngwets lead

o, answers iea^ us
uo dhectly
t*cu iy to
to Ute
literarv
Such questions and their varmu ^ only with ontological quJ .
theory because literary ' ' ' ^ . " sts) but also with ep.stemolog.cal issU(Si
tions (e.g., whether a text re C nowing). When we ask, then, if literature's
(e.g., how we know or ways we are really asking epistemologiCal
chief function is to entertain or to t ^ Qr to be entertained, We
questions. Whether we read a te ^ Unow " that text,
can say that once we have read a /^ ^ distinct ways. The first way
We can know a text, howe ' analysis. When we have studied,
involves the typical literature c a arrived at an interpretation, we can
analyzed, and critiqued a text a he text On the other hand, when we
then confidently assert that we n ^ j ames mystery novel to discover
stay up all night turning the PaS^ that we know the text because we have
who the murderer is, we can a ^ its seCondary world, consumed by its
spent time devouring its page ' seeking the resolution of its tensions.
characters, and by novel s end e a ^ ly seek g Qther ^ entertain__
r , * - >
two The
different ways.
French rnnnaitre can
verbs savoir and connaitre can both
uuu be translated to know"
and can highlight for us the difference between these two epistemological
goals or ways of knowing a text. Savoir means "to analyze (from the Greek
analuein, "to undo") and "to study." The word is used to refer to knowing
something that is the object of study and assumes that the object, such as a
text, can be examined, analyzed, and critiqued. Know ledge or learning about
is the ultimate goal.
Connaitre, on the other hand, implies that we intim ately know or have
experienced the text. Connaitre is used for knowing people and refers also to
know ing an au thor's canon. Both knowing persons and know ing all a
w riter's works imply intimacy, learning the particular qualities of one per
son or author, the ins and outs of each. Indeed, it is this intim acy that one
often experiences while reading a mystery novel all night long. It is knowing
or knowledge o f that the word means.
To know how to analyze a text, to discuss its literary elem ents, and to
apply the various methodologies of literary criticism m eans that we know
that text (savoir). To have experienced the text to have cried along with or
about its characters, to have lost time and sleep im m ersed in the secondary
world it creates, and to have felt our em otions stirred b y the text als0
means that we know that text (connaitre). From one w ay o f knowing/ we
C hapter 1 Defining C ritlci.sm, Theory, and Literati!re 17
learn facts or information; from tlu* other, we encounter and participate in an

intimate experience.
At tinus, we have actually known the text from both these perspectives.
While analyzing and critiquing a text (navoir), we have often (and perhaps
mom often than not) simultaneously experienced it, becoming emotionally
involved with its characters' choices and destinies (contmitrc) and imagining
ourselves to be these characters or at least recognizing some of our own
characteristics dramatized by the characters.
To say that w e know a text is no sim ple statem ent. U nderlying our
private and public reactions and our scholarly critiques and analyses is our
literary theory, the fountainhead of our most intimate and our m ost public
declarations. The form al study of literary theory, therefore, enables us to
explain our responses to any text and allows us to articulate the function of
literature in an academ ic and a personal way.
B E G IN N IN G T H E F O R M A L S T U D Y O F L IT E R A R Y T H E O R Y
This chapter has stressed the im portance of literary theory and criticism
and its relationship to literature and the interpretative processes. It has also
articulated the underlying prem ises of w hy a study of literary theory is
essential:
Literary theory assumes that there is no such thing as an innocent reading of a

text. W hether our responses are emotional and spontaneous or well reasoned
and highly structured, all such interactions with and about a text are based on
underlying factors that cause us to respond to that text in a particular fashion.
What elicits these responses or how a reader makes sense of a text is at the heart
of literary theory.
Because our reactions to any text have theoretical bases, all readers must have a
literary theory. The methods we use to frame our personal interpretations of any
text directly involve us in the process of literary criticism and theory, automati
cally making us practicing literary critics.
Many readers have a literary theory that is more often than not unconscious, in
complete, ill informed, and eclectic; therefore, readers' interpretations can easily
be illogical, unsound, and haphazard. A well-defined, logical, and clearly articu
lated literary theory consciously and purposefully enables readers to develop
their own methods of interpretation, permitting them to order, clarify, and justify
their appraisals of a text in a consistent and logical manner.
Today m any critics use the term s literary criticism and literary theory inter
changeably. Still others use the terms literary theory and Continental philosophy
synonymously. Although the sem antic boundaries betw een literary criticism
and literary theory (and sometimes Continental philosophy) are a bit blurred,
literary criticism assumes that literary theory exists and that literary criticism
rests on literary theory's concepts, ideas, and ever-developing principles.
IS Chapter I lYfining Criticism, T heory, and Literature
It is the goal of this text to enable readers to make such conscious

formed, and intelligent choices, and in doing so, refine their own nu-th, ?
of literary interpretation and more precisely understand their persona*
and public reactions to texts. To accomplish this goal, this text will jntr
duce readers to literary theory and criticism, its historical development
and the various theoretical positions or schools of criticism, enabling read
ers to become knowledgeable critics of their own and others' interpreta
tions. By becoming acquainted with diverse and often contradictory
approaches to textual analysis, readers will broaden their perspectives not
only about themselves but also about others and the world in which
they live.
A Historical. Survey of
Literary Criticism
No poet, no artist, has his [or her] complete meaning alone.
T. S. Eliot, "Tradition and the Individual Talent"
IN T R O D U C T IO N
uestions about the value, the structure, and the definition of literature
Q undoubtedly arose in all cultures as people heard or read works of art.
Such practical criticism probably began with the initial hearing or reading of
the first literary works. The Greeks of the fifth century BCE were the first,
however, to articulate and develop the philosophy of art and life that serves
as the foundation for m ost theoretical and practical criticism. Assuredly,
hearers and perform ers of the Homeric poems commented on and inter
preted these works before the fifth century BCE, but it was the fifth-century
Athenians who questioned the very act of reading and writing itself while
pondering the purpose of literature. Some scholars date the origin of literary
criticism by citing the performance of Aristophanes' play, The Frogs in 405
BCE. The play was performed as a part of a contest among dramatists, with
Aristophanes receiving first prize. To win the contest, a literary judge or
judges had to declare The Frogs the "best" play, thus initiating literary criti
cism. By so doing, these early critics began a debate about the nature and
function of literature that continues to the present day. What they inaugu
rated was the formal study of literary criticism.
From the fifth century BCE to the present, numerous critics such as
Plato, Dante A lighieri, W illiam W ordsworth, M ikhail Bakhtin, Jacques
Derrida, Louise R osenblatt, Stephen Greenblatt, Judith Butler, Lawrence
Buell, and a host of others, have developed principles of criticism that have
had a major influence on the continuing discussion of literary criticism. By
examining these critics' ideas, we can gain an understanding of and participate
19
20 Chapter 2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism
in this critical debate while acquiring an appreciation for and a w0rkine

knowledge of both practical and theoretical criticism. o
PLA TO (C. 427-347 BCE)
Alfred North Whitehead, a modern British philosopher, once quipped that

"all of Western philosophy is but a footnote to Plato." Although others have
indeed contributed to Western thought, Plato's ideas, expressed in his Ion,
Crito, the Republic, Laws, and other works, laid the foundation for many, if
not most, of the pivotal issues of philosophy and literature, including the
concepts of truth, beauty, and goodness; the nature of reality; the structure of
society; the nature and relations of being (ontology); questions about how
we know w hat we know (epistemology); and ethics and morality. Since
Plato's day, such ideas have been debated, changed, debunked, or simply
accepted, but none has been ignored.
Before Plato, only fragmentary comments about the nature and value of
literature can be found. In the plays and writings of the comic dramatist
Aristophanes, a contemporary of Plato's, a few tidbits of practical criticism
arise but no clearly articulated literary theory. It is Plato who systematically
begins for us the study of literary theory and criticism. Plato's theories and
criticism, however, would be more clearly articulated and developed several
hundred years later by the philosopher Plotinus (204-270 CE), who reintro
duced Plato's ideas to the Western world, known today as Neoplatonism.
N evertheless, Plato's writings form the foundation upon which literary
theory rests.
The core of Platonic thought resides in Plato's doctrine of Essences, Ideas,
or Forms. Ultimate reality, he states, is spiritual. This spiritual realm, what
Plato calls The One, is composed of "id eal" forms or absolutes that exist
whether or not any mind posits their existence or reflects their attributes. It is
these ideal forms that give shape to our physical world because our material
world is nothing more than a shadow, a replica, of the absolute forms found
in the spiritual realm. In the material world, we can, therefore, recognize a
chair as a chair because the ideal chair exists in this spiritual realm and pre
ceded the existence of the material chair. Without the existence of the ideal
chair, the physical chair, which is nothing more than a shadow or replica
representation, imitation, reflectionof the ideal chair, could not exist.
Such an emphasis on philosophical ideals earmarks the beginning of the
first articulated literary theory and becomes the foundation for literary criti
cism. Before Plato and the establishment of his Academy (the name of the
school he founded in 387 BCE), Greek culture ordered its world through
poetry and the poetic imagination that is, by hearing such epics as the IhW
and Odyssey or by attending the play cycles, the Greeks saw good characters
ChtiphT 2 A I listorical Su rvcy of Literary Criticism 21
in acton pt*rfo r m ing good deeds. From such stories, they formulated their
theor.es t goodness and other similar standards, thereby m in* the presen-
ta um* 1 " H 1 or i iscovering truth: observing good characters actit.g justly,
honora >v, aiu courageously and inculcating these characteristics within
thcn.se v is. it i the advent of Pinto and his Academy, philosophical
inquiry ant a .struct thinking usurped the narrative as a method for discov
ering trut .. Not by accident, then, Plato places above his school door the
words, Let no one enter here who is not a geometer" (a master of geometry;
one skilled in formal logic and reasoning). To matriculate at Plato's
Academy, Plato s students had to value the art of reason and abstraction as
opposed to the presentational mode for discovering truth.
This art of abstract reasoning and formal logic not only usurps litera
ture's role as an evaluating mode for discerning truth, but also condemns it.
If ultimate reality rests in the spiritual realm, and the material world is only
a shadow or replica of the world of ideals, then according to Plato and his
follow ers, poets (those w ho com pose im aginative literature) are m erely
im itating an im itation w hen they w rite about any object in the m aterial
world. Accordingly, Plato declares that a poet's craft is "an inferior w ho mar
ries an inferior and has inferior offspring," because the poet is one w ho is
now two steps removed from ultimate reality. These imitators of mere shad
ows, contends Plato, cannot be trusted.
W hile condem ning poets for producing art that is nothing more than a
copy of a co p y Plato also argues that poets produce their art irrationally re
lying on untrustw orthy intuition rather than reason for their inspiration. He
writes, "For the poet is a light and winged and holy thing, and there is no
invention in him until he has been inspired and is out of his senses, and then
the mind is no longer in him ." Because such inspiration opposes reason and
asserts that truth can be attained intuitively, Plato condemns all poets.
B ecause poets are untrustw orthy and dam ned, their w orks can no
longer be the basis of the G reeks' m orality or ethics. Lies abound in the
works of poets, argues Plato critical lies about the nature of ultimate reality
and dangerous lies about hum an reality In the Iliad, for example, the gods lie
and cheat and are one of the m ain causes of suffering among humans. Even
the m ortals in these w orks steal, com plain, and hate each other. Such writ
ings, contends Plato, set a bad exam ple for Greek citizens and may lead nor
mally law -abiding people down paths of w ickedness and immorality. In the
Republic, Plato ultim ately concludes that the poets must be banished from
Greek society
In a later w ork, Law s, Book VIII, Plato recants the total banishm ent of
poets from society, ack n o w led g in g the need for poets and their craft to
"celebrate the v icto rs" of the state. In this work, Plato then asserts tlurt only
those poets "w h o are them selves good and also honourable in the state can
be tolerated. In m aking this statem ent, Plato decrees poetry s function
value in and for his society: to sing the praises of loyal Greeks. Accordingly,
22 C h ap ter 2 A Historical Survey of I.iterary C riticism
poets must be supporters of the state o r risk exile from their homul
Being mere im itators of reality in effect, g ood bars these artisans and
their craft must be religiously censured.
Bv directlv linking politics and literature in a moral and reasoned vvorij,
view, Plato and his Academy founded a com plex theory of literary critiCiSrn
that initiated the debate, still ongoing, on the value, nature, and worth of the
A R IS T O T L E (384-322 BCE)
W hereas literary criticism 's concern w ith m orality began w ith Plato, its em
phasis on the elem ents of w hich a w ork is com posed began w ith Plato's fa
m ous pupil, Aristotle. Rejecting som e of Plato's beliefs about the nature of
reality, A ristotle opts for a detailed investigation of the m aterial world.
The son of a medical doctor from Thrace, Aristotle reveled in the physical
w orld. After studying at Plato's Academy and m astering the philosophy and
the techniques of inquiry taught there, Aristotle founded the Lyceum, a school
of scientific and philosophical thought and investigation in 335 BCE. Unlike
P lato's private Academy, Aristotle's Lyceum (its nam e originating from the
A thenian public exercise park or gymnasium where Aristotle taught) was open
to the general public and free to all. The Lyceum is also know n as the
Peripatetic School of Athens, taking its name from the Greek word peripatein,
m ean in g w alk, because Aristotle supposedly lectured his pupils while
strolling the tree-lined grounds of the park. Applying his scientific methods of
investigation to the study of literature, Aristotle answers Plato's accusations
again st p oetry in a series of lectures known as the Poetics. Unlike exoteric
treatises m eant for general publication, the Poetics is an esoteric work, one
m eant for private circulation to those who attended the Lyceum. Although it
lacks the unity and coherence of Aristotle's other works, it remains one of the
m ost im portant critical influences on literary theory and criticism.
A ristotle's Poetics has becom e the cornerstone of W estern literary criti
cism . By applying his analytic abilities to a definition of tragedy, Aristotle
began in the Poetics a discussion of the basic com ponents of a literary work
that continues to the present day. U nfortunately m any critics and scholars
m istakenly assum e that the Poetics is a how -to m anual, defining and setting
the standards for literature (particularly tragedy) for all time. Aristotle's pur
pose, how ever, was not to form ulate a series of absolute rules for evaluating
a tragedy, but to state the general principles of tragedy, as he viewed them in
his tim e, w hile resp ond ing to m any of P la to 's d octrin es and arguments.
Even his title, the Poetics, reveals A ristotle's purpose because in Greek the
w ord poetikes m eans "th in g s that are m ade or cra fte d ." Like a biologist/
Aristotle dissects tragedy to discover its constituent or crafted parts.
C h ap ter 2 A l listorical Survey of Literary Criticism 23
At the beginning of the Poetics, Aristotle notes that "ep ic poetry, tragedy,
comedy, d ith yram bic poetry, and m ost form s of flute and lyre playing all
happen to be, in general, im itations." Although all of these im itations differ
in how and w hat they im itate, Aristotle agrees with Plato that all the arts are
imitations. In particular, the art of poetry exists because people are imitative
creatures w ho enjoy su ch im itation. W hereas Plato contend s that the aes
thetic pleasure poetry is capable of arousing can underm ine the structure of
society and all its values, A ristotle strongly disagrees. H is disagreem ent is
basically a m etaphysical argum ent concerning the nature of im itation itself.
W hereas Plato decrees that im itation is two steps rem oved from the truth or
realm o f the ideal (the poet im itating an object that is itself an im itation of an
ideal form ), A ristotle contends that poetry is m ore universal, m ore general
than things as they are, asserting that "it is not the function of the poet to re
late w hat has happened, but w hat m ay happen w hat is possible according
to the law of probability or necessity." It is the historian, not the poet, w ho
writes of w hat has already happened. The p oet's task, declares A ristotle, is to
write of w hat could happen. "Poetry, therefore, is a more philosophical and a
higher thing than history: for poetry tends to express the universal, history
the p a rticu la r." In argu ing that p o ets p resen t things n o t as th ey are, b u t
as they should be, A ristotle rebuffs P lato's concept that the p oet is m erely
imitating an im itation, for A ristotle's poet, w ith his em phasis on the univer
sal, actually attains som ething nearer to the ideal than does Plato's.
In A risto tle 's view , n o t all im itatio n s by p oets are the sam e becau se
"w riters of greater dignity im itated the noble actions of noble heroes; the less
dignified sort of w riters im itated the actions of inferior m en ." "C o m ed y,"
writes A ristotle, "is an im itation of base m en [. . .] characterized not by every
kind of vice but specifically by 'the ridiculous,' som e error or ugliness that is
painless and has no harm ful effects." It is to tragedy, w ritten by poets im itat
ing noble actions and heroes, that A ristotle turns his m ajor attention.
A ristotle's com plex definition of tragedy as found in the Poetics has per
plexed and frustrated m any readers:
Tragedy is, then, an imitation of a noble and complete action, having the proper
magnitude; it employs language that has been artistically enhanced by each of
the kinds of linguistic adornment, applied separately in the various parts of the
play; it is presented in dramatic, not narrative form, and achieves, through the
representation of pitiable and fearful incidents, the catharsis of such pitiable
and fearful incidents.
When placed in con text w ith other ideas in the Poetics, this com plex defini
tion highlights A ristotle's chief contributions to literary criticism:1
1. Tragedy, or a work of art, is an imitation of nature that reflects a high form of art
in exhibiting noble characters and noble deeds, the act of imitation itself giving
us pleasure.
of Literary C'ritU
24 Chapter 2 A Historical Survey
2. Art P, for,,, i , m-g.-iy,...... .... """'lie

and an od. with e.uh of the part- being I y g * r"""y
thin,. is an o*aic wholo, will, its various par >1 > 1 '"H .t., 1 . y'
3. In tragedy, concord for form inusl hop, von to ' n w(|0 jh ' ' "
luiv of tl,o drama because tl,o tragic I,on, inns ' . t n'',Vr|y
S,HKl and just, yol whoso misfortune is brought abm" nol 1^ , rdepravity, b >
by sonu- error or frailty, f lo must bo one who is h.My rontmu o,l and prosporv.
Furthermore, all tragic heroes have a tragic flaw, or iam %, ii i<u s to their
downfall in such a way as not to offend the audience s sense o jus ice.
4. The tragedy must have an emotional effect on its auc icnce an t trough pity
and fear" effect a catharsisthat
and fear" effect a catharsisthat is, by the play's end, the audience's ernotins
* is, oy m~ t v
j /u/hnf Ari: ** 4 1by catharsis
------ "
should be purged, purified, or clarified. (What Aristotle really meant
is debatable; see glossary entry for further details.)
5. The universal, not the particular, should be stressed. Unlike history that deals
with what happens, poetry or tragedy deals with what could happen and is,
therefore, closer to perfection or truth than history itself.
6 . The poet must give close attention to diction or language, be it in verse, prose, or
;; but ultimately, it is the thoughts expressed through language that are of the
song;
utmost concern.
Interestingly, nowhere in the Poetics does Aristotle address the didactic

value of poetry or literature. Unlike Plato, whose c ic concern is e su ject
matter of poetry and its effects on the reader, Aristotle emphasizes literary
form or structure, examining the component parts of a trage y and how
these parts must work together to produce a unified whole.
From the writings of these philosopher-artists arise the concerns, ques
tions, and debates that have spearheaded the development of most literary crit
icism. By addressing different aspects of these fourth-century BCE critics ideas
and concepts, other literary critics from the Middle Ages to the present have
formulated theories of literary criticism that force us to ask different, but also
legitimate, questions of a text. Nevertheless, the shadows of Plato and Aristotle
and their concerns loom over much of what these later theorists espouse.
H ORACE (65-8 BCE)
With the passing of the glory that was Greece and its philosopher-artists
came the grandeur of Rome and its chief stylist, Quintus H oratius Flaccus, or
s.mply Horace. Friend of Emperor Augustus and m any other m em bers of
the Roman aristocracy, Horace enjoyed the w ealth and influ ence o f these
associates. In a letter to the sons of r ,
Hnracp i u lu h,s fnends and patrons, Maecenas,
norace articulated what became thp off;,s;..i r .
Middle A pps " Utl canon f literary taste during the
ing this letter and his Ars P o e tic (The Ar. f N eoclass.c period. By read-
any medieval knight, and even such lit . a" y Rom an ar,stocr" t'
itc rnry m asters as the e i g h t e e n t h -
Chapter 2 A Historical Su
Survey of Literary Criticism 25
century scholar-poet Alexander I>
proper literature. ope could learn the standards of good or
ly acquainted with Aristotle's works, his
m aintains, one should write about traditional subjects in unique ways. In'ad-
dition, the poet should avoid all extremes in subject matter, diction (word
choice), vocabu lary, and style. G aining m astery in these areas could be
achieved by reading and following the examples of the classical Greek and
Roman authors. For exam ple, because authors of antiquity began their epics
in the m iddle of things, all epics must begin in medias res. Above all, writers
should avoid appearing ridiculous and must aim their sights low, not attempt
ing to be a new Virgil or Homer.
Literature's ultim ate aim, declares Horace, is "dulce et utile," to be "sw eet
and useful." The best writings, he asserts, both teach and delight. To achieve
this goal, poets m ust understand their audiences; the learned reader may
want to be instructed, whereas others may simply read to be amused. The
poet's task is to com bine usefulness and delight in the same literary work.
O ften oversim p lified and m isunderstood, H orace opts for giving the
would-be w riter practical guidelines for the author's craft while leaving un
attended and unchallenged m any of the philosophical concerns of Plato and
Aristotle. For H orace, a poet's greatest reward is the adulation of the public.
L O N G IN U S (F IR S T C E N T U R Y C E)
Although his date of birth and national origin remain controversial, Longinus
(sometimes referred to as Pseudo-Longinus) garners an important place in lit
erary history for his treatise On the Sublime, a response to a work by Caecillus
of Calacte, a Sicilian rhetorician. Probably a Greek, Longinus often peppers
his Greek and Latin w ritings w ith Hebrew quotations, making him the first
lifprarv critic to borrow from a different literary tradition than his own and
Chapter 2 A Historical Survey of Literary C riticism
26
a repeated examination, and which it is difficult or rather impossible to

stand and the memory of which is strong and hard to efface." Simpl Wlt^
Longinus defines the sublim e as "th e echo of greatest of spirit" while
identifying its five key elements: ( 1 ) the pow er of forming great co n ce p t $
(2) vehement and inspired passion; (3) the due form ation of figures, such^'
word order and appropriate audience; (4) noble diction; and (5) d ig n ify
elevated composition. Longinus also contends that all readers are innately**^
pable of recognizing the sublime, for "N ature has appointed us to be no ba<*
or ignoble animals [.. .] for she implants in our souls the unconquerable l0v
of whatever is elevated and more divine than w e." W hen our intellects, 0Ur
emotions, and our wills harm oniously respond to a given work of art, We
know, says Longinus, that we have been touched by the sublime.
Until the late seventeenth century, few people considered Longinus's On
the Sublime important or had even read it. By the eighteenth century, its sig
nificance was recognized, and the treatise was quoted and debated by most
public authors. Emphasizing the author (one who must possess a great mind
and a great soul), the work itself (a text that must be composed of dignified
and elevated diction w hile sim ultaneously disposing the reader to high
thoughts), and the reader's response (the reaction of a learned audience in
large part determines the value or worth of any given text), Longinus's criti
cal method foreshadows New Criticism, reader-oriented criticism, and other
schools of twentieth-century criticism.
P L O T IN U S (2 0 4 -2 7 0 CE)
Born in Egypt in 204 CE, Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism, traveled to

Alexandria in his mid-twenties, where he was taught by Longinus's teacher,
Ammonius Saccas. Ammonius sparked Plotinus's inextinguishable love for
philosophy, and in 244 CE, Plotinus left Ammonius in an attempt to discover
Persian and Indian wisdom firsthand. Accompanying the Emperor Gordian on
an expedition to Persia, Plotinus hoped to engage Persia's leading philosophers
in dialogue. Plotinus never reached Persia because Emperor Gordian was as
sassinated. Plotinus then traveled to Rome, where he taught philosophy for the
next twenty years. Urged on by his most famous student, Porphyry, Plotinus
began to write his own treatises in an attempt, he believed, to articulate clearly
other scholars garbled misinterpretations of Plato, whom Plotinus declared to
be the ultimate authority on all philosophical matters. At the time of his death
in 270, Plotinus had authored fifty-four treatises, all of which were collected,
edited, and named the Enneads by his student and friend Porphyry.
Through dialogues with his students, and especially Porphyry, Plotinus
developed and clearly articulated the most pivotal concept stemming from
the teachings of Plato: The One. Plato m entions The One only briefly in
armemdes, also referring to parts of this concept, such as the Good, in the
C haptiT 2 A l lintork.il Survey of Literary C'ritU ism
27
^ p u b lic . Sim u ltan eo u sly T h e O ne is "u n iq u e and absolutely uncom plex"

Init also "ab solu tely tran scen d en tal." Both to and from The O ne all thirds
flow, and it is the com plete origin of everything. H um anity's goal, both Plato
md Plotinus believed, w as to achieve unity with The O ne through contem
plation and study.
* Because unity w ith T he O ne is the goal of humanity, Plotinus assorts that
hum anity exists in other form s of being: Intelligence (nous), Soul (psyche),
d M atter (physis) w hich are separate from The O ne but also stem from it.
Intelligence corresp ond s w ith P lato's realm of ideas. In this m ode, people
comprehend ideas and concepts through the intellect, not the senses. Within
this level of intellect em erges cognitive identity. By thinking and conceptual
izing, Intelligence also conceptualizes itself. This dim ension Plotinus refers
to as "th e realm of num ber," giving this nam e to the next dom ain, the Soul.
In Plotinus's philosophic system , the Soul refers to the overarching Soul that
runs through not only hum anity bu t also the entire creation. A ccording to
Plotinus, all souls form only one Soul; such unity allow s all souls to inter
com m unicate by extrasensory m eans. The Soul, how ever, has a selfish desire
to possess itself, resulting in Matter, the third or low est m ode of being. For
Plotinus, M atter is at first praisew orthy because creation is able to know The
One only because of its overflow into matter. But m atter is also fallen, for it is
the low est form of existence, one that is m ore frequently than not separate
from The One.
Plotinus's com plex philosophy becom es pivotal to literary criticism b e
cause of its ad op tion and ad aptation by m any scholars and p h ilosop h ers
throughout the su b sequ en t centu ries. Im m ed iately follow in g P lotin u s,
Porphyry of Tyre and his contem poraries continue the journey tow ard tran
scendence. In the fourth century, St. A ugustine, accom panied by B oethius
in the fifth centu ry, b len d ed P lo tin u s's co n cep ts of N eo p la to n ism w ith
Christianity. T h is b len d in g of N eoplatonism and C h ristian ity even tu ally
influenced m ed iev al sch olars such as St. Thom as A qu inas and M eister
Eckhard. N ot surprisingly, centuries later the A m erican transcendentalists
Ralph Waldo Em erson and Henry David Thoreau borrow and am end some
of Plotinus's key concepts, incorporating these ideas into the key assum p
tions of A m erican Rom anticism .
A longside Plato and Aristotle, m any scholars consider Plotinus one of
the greatest philosophers of antiquity. Clearly, it is the w ritings and teaching
of Plotinus that form m uch of the Western perception of Plato and his works.
D A N T E A L IG H I E R I (1 2 6 5 -1 3 2 1 )
Born in Florence, Italy, during the M iddle Ages, Dante is one of the most sig
nificant contributors to literary criticism since Longinus an otinus an
the appearance of their texts On the Sublime and the Enneads, approximately
one thousand years earlier. Like Longinus, Dante's concern is thc

eutiee for poetry.
Banished from his native Florence for political reasons, Dante wrot*.
of his works in exile, including his masterpiece, Commedia (c. 13](g.]32]^ a ny
named La DivinaCommedia, or The Divine Comedy. Written in three
Inferno (c. 1314), Purgatorio(c. 1319), and Paradtso (c. 1321) The D
(and the world depicted in it) mirrors Dante's contemporary world anT'dy
concept of Christianity. Even before the third part of The Divine Corned * hs
published, Dante was already being heralded as Tuscany's greatest poet ^ Was
introduction to the Paradiso, the third and last section of the Commedia 0 Sari
wrote a letter to Can Grande della Scala explaining his literary theory. K n ^
today as Letter to Can Grande della Scala, this pivotal work of literary thWn
states that the language spoken by the people (the vulgar tongue or tjle60r^
nacular) is an appropriate, acceptable, and beautiful language for writin ^
Until the publication of Dante's works, Latin was the universal 1
guage, and all important workssuch as histories, Church documents ^
even government decreeswere written in this official Church tongue Oni^
frivolous or popular works appeared in the vulgar language of the com ^
people. But in his Letter, Dante asserts and establishes that the vemacularn
both an excellent and appropriate vehicle for works of literature.
In the Letter, Dante also notes that he uses multiple levels of interpretatio
or symbolic meaning in The Divine Comedy. Since the time of St. Augustine and
throughout the Middle Ages, Church theologians, writers, and priests had
followed a tradition of allegoric reading of Scripture that interpreted man
of the Old Testament laws and stories as symbolic representations (allegories)
of Christ's actions. Such a semiotic interpretationreading of signshad
been applied only to Scripture. Until Dante's Commedia, no secular work had
used these principles of symbolic interpretation.
Praising the lyric poem and ignoring a discussion of genres, Dante estab
lished himself as the leading critic of the Middle Ages. Because he declared a
people's common language or the vernacular to be an acceptable vehicle of
expression for writing literature, literary works found an ever-increasing
audience. 6
G IO VA N N I BO C C A C C IO (1313-1375)
Little is known of the early life of Giovanni Boccaccio. Bom the illegitimate
son of a wealthy merchant from Florence, Italy, in 1313, Boccaccio moved to
Paris in his late teens to pursue his studies of the new humanistic literature
appearing on the literary scene. In Paris he wrote some of his first vernacular
poetry and was exposed to the works of Petrarch. But Dante was Boccaccio's
poet-hero," and like Dante, Boccaccio often w rote in the vernacular. He
C hapter 2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism 29
eventually returned to Florence, where he and most other Europeans experi
enced the Black Death of 1348 (a disease that killed about 25 t X m
oT n ( eVC'ntS f hiS ,ime in his most famous w ^ k ,
Deuimeron (1358), a frame narrative consisting of one hundred tales. By 1360,
Boccaccto was the center of Florentine culture, being one of the founders of
the Renaissance. In 1373, he delivered the now famous Lecturae Danlis
(' Reading o Dante ), the first lecture series ever dedicated to a European
vernacular text, Dante s Cotntnedia. Boccaccio's most influential scholarly
work is his De Genealogia Deorum Gentilium, or On the Genealogy o f the Gods o f
the Gentiles (1374), a collection of classical myths and legends. It is this work
that serves as a window into literary criticism of the 1300s. In this mammoth
encyclopedia of m yths, Boccaccio successfully maneuvers through the
scholasticism of the late medieval ages and the humanism of the dawning
Renaissance, a shift of focus from God and the afterlife to the present mo
ment, focusing prim arily on the problem of the human condition. For
Boccaccio, myths reflect both truth and reality, while simultaneously having
moral and religious value. Particularly in books fourteen and fifteen of The
Genealogy o f the Gods, Boccaccio defends poetry and classical myth, stating that
the purpose of poetry is to improve life by revealing both truth and God,
thereby disavowing Plato's beliefs that poetry is useless or full of lies. Poetry,
asserts Boccaccio, comes from the bosom of God" and moves the minds of a
few men from on high to a yearning for the eternal." The poet is like a philos
opher who seeks truth through contemplation rather than reason. In similar
fashion, the poet is equal to the theologian who seeks knowledge about God
Himself. And the truth found by the poet in poetry or literature lies in allegory,
revealing its truthfulness in a fair and fitting garment of fiction." Even Christ
Himself, Boccaccio points out, used stories or literature to reveal truth.
Boccaccio's defense of poetry had an immediate and lasting impact on
literary theory and criticism , especially throughout the Renaissance.
Boccaccio's concerns, critical writings, and collection of myths continue to
appear in texts for the next several centuries, including those of Chaucer,
Spenser, Jonson, Milton, and Shelley, to name a few. And it is Boccaccio's de
fense of poetry that paves the way for one of the most famous defenses of all,
Sir Philip Sidney's Defense o f Poesy.
SIR P H IL IP S ID N E Y (1 5 5 4 -1 5 8 6 )
The paucity of literary criticism and theory during much

is remedied by the abundance of critical activity during the Renaissance,
pecially by the critic and writer Sir Philip Si ney. eentleman of
Considered the representative scholar, writer, t d f h e to . great
Renaissance England, Sidney has been appropriately named g
Fnelish critic-poet. His work A Apology fo r Poetry (published 1595; Gri

naUT oeT u e o f Poesy) is the definitive formulation of Renaissance 1 * 4
theory and the first influential piece of literary criticism in English histo^
With Sidney begins the English tradition and history of literary criticism.
As evidenced in An Apology for Poetry, Sidney is eclechc, borrowing and
often amending the theories of Plato, Aristotle, Horace, and a few of his con
temporary Italian critics. He begins his criticism by quoting from Aristotle;
"Poesy therefore is an art of imitation, for so Aristotle termeth it in his word
mimesis, that is to say, a representing, counterfeiting, or figuring forth."
Eight words later, he adds a Horatian note, declaring poesy s chief end to be
"to teach and delight." Like Aristotle, Sidney values poetry over history, laW/
and philosophy, but he takes Aristotle s idea one step further in declaring
that poetry, above all the other arts and sciences, embodies truth. For poetry
alone, he declares, is a teacher of virtue, moving the mind and spirit to both
teach and desire to be taught. And the poet is the most persuasive advocate
of virtue, and none other exposes vice so effectively.
Unlike critics before him, Sidney best personifies the Renaissance period
when he delineates his literary precepts. After ranking the different literary
genres and declaring all to be instructive, he proclaims that poetry excels all
because poetry is "the noblest of all w'orks of [humankind]. He mocks other
genres (e.g., tragicomedy) and adds more dictates to Aristotelian tragedy by
insisting on unity of action, time, and place.
Throughout An Apology for Poetry, Sidney stalwartly defends poetry
against those who would view' it as a mindless or immoral activity. For Sidney,
creative poetry is akin to religion, for both guide and achieve their purpose by
stirring the emotions of the reader. The poet, says Sidney, not only affirms
morality, but by engaging the reader's emotions, blends truth w'ith symbolism,
delighting "every sense and faculty of the w'hole being." By the essay's end, a
passionate and somewhat Platonically inspired poet places a curse on all those
who do not love poetry. Sidney concludes, "I conjure you all . . . no more to
scorn the sacred mysteries of Poesy. . . Thus doing, your name shall flourish in
the printer's shops . . . you shall dwell upon superlatives." England did indeed
rise up and take notice, for in the twenty-five years after An Apology for Poetry,
thirty-seven new works of drama and poetry took England by storm. And
echoes of Sidney's emotionality reverberate throughout the centuries in
English literature, especially in British romantic writings of the early 1800s.
JOHN DRVDEN (1631-1700)
; * 8liSh Wri,er- ,0 h " D'y d e n - p e , laureate, dramatist.

z ;,tto
c y1zand
d f,h
eNeixiasstai^
the Renaissance. Dr. Samuel Johnson, a ,h
ew;
Chapter 2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism
31
lexicographer who authored Dictionary o f the English Language (1755) a work

considered to be one of the greatest single achievements of scholarship " at
tributes to Dryden the improvement, perhaps the completion of our meter
the refinement of our language, and much of the correctness of our senti
ments." The most prolific writer of the Restoration (the name given to that
period of English literature from 1660 to 1700), Dryden excelled in almost all
genres, including literary criticism . In effect, says one critic, Dryden
"brought literary criticism out of the church and into the coffee house." And
T. S. Eliot, the great twentieth-century poet and essayist, asserts that Dryden
wrote the first serious literary criticism in English by an English poet."
Dryden's lasting contribution to literary criticism, An Essay o f Dramatic Poesy
(1668), highlights his genius.
The structure of D ryden's An Essay o f Dramatic Poesy dram atizes
Dryden's keen literary talent: During a naval battle between the English and
the Dutch, four men are floating down a barge on the Thames River, each
setting forth a different aesthetic theory among those prominently espoused
in Renaissance and N eoclassical literary criticism . The Platonic and
Aristotelian debate concerning the nature or inherent condition of art as an
imitation of nature itself begins the discussion. Nature, argues one debater,
must be imitated directly, whereas another declares that writers should imi
tate the classical authors such as Homer because such ancient writers were
the best imitators of nature. Through the voice of Neander, Dryden presents
the benefits of both positions.
A lengthy discussion then ensues over the Aristotelian concept of the
three unities of time, place, and action within a drama. Should the plot of a
drama take place during one twenty-four-hour cycle (time)? And in one lo
cation (place)? Should it be only a single plot, with no subplots (action)? The
position that a drama must keep the three unities unquestionably wins the
debate. Other concerns center on the following:
1. The language or diction of a play, with the concluding emphasis being placed on
"proper" speech
2. Issues of decorum, that is, whether violent acts should appear on the stage, with
the final speaker declaring it would be quite "improper"
3. The differences between the English and French theaters, with the English
drama winning out for its diversity, its use of the stage, and its Shakespearian
tradition
4. The value of rhymed as opposed to blank verse in the drama, with rhymed verse
the victoralthough Dryden later recanted this position and wrote many of his
tragedies in blank verse. A reflection of his age in his life and works, Dryden
sides with politesse (courteous formality), clarity, order, decorum, elegance, clev
erness, and wit as the controlling characteristics of literary works.
Overall, Dryden's contribution to literary criticism is immense. First, he de

velops the study of literature in and of itself, not obsessing over its mora
32 Chapter 2 . A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism
. (hl*0|oeical worth. Second, he creates a natural, simple prose style

?h" , ' s ouides and affects modern criticism and w r.tm g in genJ ' f
Third by making use of a variety of critical p ersp ectiv es-fro m Creek 0
French-Dryden brings all of these critical perspectives best msigh,s into
ihe still infant discipline of English literary criticism. And finally, Dryden
advocates for the establishing of objective principles of criticism, while si.
multaneously moving the emphasis of criticism away from the construc
tion of a work into its more modern emphasis on how readers and critics
appreciate texts.
JOSEPH ADDISON (1672-1719)
Essayist, poet, dramatist, politician, and literary critic Joseph Addison was
born on May 1, 1672, the son of the rector of Milston, Wiltshire, England.
After graduating from Charterhouse, a prominent English boarding school,
Addison attended Magaden College, Oxford University, graduating in
1693. Receiving a royal pension and multiple political appointments
throughout his life, this Latin poet and classical scholar saw his popularity
rise in 1704 with the publication of his poem "The Campaign." Working
alongside other critics such as John Dryden and Alexander Pope, Addison
highlights the concept of the "greatness of literature" in his essays and
newspaper articles, appealing to the common readers of England. His clas
sical training served him well throughout his life, fostering his reading and
criticism of literature. His literary criticism first appeared in the newspaper
begun by Richard Steele and Addison, The Tatler, and its successor, The
Spectator. Although his critical essays were rather sparse in The Tatler,
Addison's critical commentaries blossomed in The Spectator, filling the
newspaper with classical and contemporary readings while simultaneously
tempering the readings' tone, diction, and content for popular readers,
making his writing "polite."
Throughout his essays, Addison more frequently than not acknowl
edges the superiority of the ancient critics compared with the modern ones,
paying homage to Aristotelian and Longinian ideas, among others. In
Spectator 25, for example, he writes, "It is impossible for us who live in the
later Ages of the World to make Observations in Criticism, Morality, or in
any Art or Science, which has not been touched upon by others." In short,
the past critics have already said all there is to say, and to write after them is
to expound upon and justify their past criticism.
Bdievmg that "philosophy was the elegant com m on sense apt to
mou [humankind]," Addison became known as the "British Virgil," and
c lo itsa n d Lh mdy, Ma,rCUS Aureliu s" who brought "philosophy out of
closets and libraries, schools and colleges, to dwell in clubs and assemblies,
C h ap ter 2 A H istorical Survey of Literary Criticism 33
at tea-tables and co ffe e -h o u se s" (S p ectator 10). A voiding lofty or pious

language in his criticism , A ddison s literary goal was "to endeavor to en
liven m orality w ith w it and to tem per w it w ith m orality" (Spectator 10).
And his au d ien ce, he d eclared , w as the com m on person, especially the
women of E nglan d , n otin g , there are none to w hom this paper w ill be
more useful (S pectator 10). W hereas other English criticism of the tim e
focuses on the au thor and the rules of literature, A ddison highlights the
sublime or w hat he calls the greatness of literature: "B y greatness I do not
mean only the Bulk of any single O bject, but the Largeness of the w hole
View, considered as one entire P iece" (Spectator 412). For A ddison, great
ness in literature is not m echanical superiority, but the prow ess to display
the im m ensity of life in a w ay that transcends im agination. G reatness, or
the sublim e, com es from both "great ideas and vehem ent p assion s." The
aim of the literary critic, attests A ddison, is not to dissect the w riter of ge
nius, but to look at w hat o ccu rs in the in teractio n of literatu re and its
audience. O ur curiosity, says A ddison, is one of the strongest and m ost
lasting appetites im planted in us. Because of such curiosity, a critic's w rit
ings must be necessarily broad, touching on politics, sciences, arts, society,
and any other concern pertinent to hum anity. And the audience of such
writings should be the general public, enlightening ordinary people w ith
w ell-w ritten prose com bined with wit w hile sim ultaneously introducing
them to the study of g en iu s, the su b lim e, g reatn ess, and au d ien ce re
sponse over the m echanics of a text.
Unlike his contem porary critics and authors such as John Dryden and
Alexander Pope, Addison aimed to enlighten the common British citizen by
giving to each of them the writings of the classical authors presented in sim
ple, clear prose that could and would be discussed in the coffeehouses and at
the tea tables throughout Great Britain.
A L E X A N D E R P O P E (1 6 8 8 -1 7 4 4 )
A Roman Catholic family in Protestant-controlled England bore a healthy in

fant who w as soon deform ed and twisted in body by spinal tuberculosis.
Born at the beginning of the Neoclassical age (English literature from 1660 to
1798) and becom ing its literary voice by age twenty, Alexander Pope embod
ies in his w ritings eighteenth-century thought and literary criticism . His
early poem s such as "P a sto ra ls" (1709), The Rape o f the Lock (1712), and
"Eloisa to Abelard" (1717) establish him as a major British poet, but with the
publication of his Essay on Criticism (1711), he becomes for all practical pur
poses the "literary pope" of England. . ,. ,
In this essay Pope, unlike previous literary critics and theonsts, direc y
addresses critics rather than poets as he undertakes to codify Neoclassica
34 C h ap ter 2 A H istorical Survey of Literary C riticis
literary criticism. Toward the end of the essay, how ever, he does speak ,o
both critics and poets. criticism is the classical age
According to Pope, the Solden ^ inus. These are the writere wh*
age of Homer, Aristotle, Horace, and g (he critlc and thg J * >
discovered the truth about unerring N ^ and nQt nature becauP s
task first to know and then to copy these ,
copy nature is to copy them [the good poet is natural genius
Pope asserts that the chief requireme b ,n ( .1 s'
coupled with a knowledge of the classics an an u , 111 es
of poetry (literature). Such knowledge must be " rth P a le n e s s
and grace because "Without good breeding truth is disapproved/That only
N atural genius and good breeding being e ^ h s h e d , t l critic/ poet

must then heed certain rules, says Pope. To be a g cri i P * e n\ust
follow the established traditions as defined by the ancients. No rprisingly,
Pope spells out what these rules are and how they should be applied to
eighteenth-century verse. Great concern for poetic diction, the establishment
of the heroic couplet as a standard for verse, and the personification o
abstract ideas, for example, now become fixed standards whereas emotional
outbreaks and free verse are extraordinaire and consic ercc onre ll' w
Governed by rules, restraint, and g.H>d taste, poetry, as defined by Pope,
seeks to reaffirm truths or absolutes already discovered by the classical writ
ers The critic's task is dear: to validate and maintain classical values in the
ever-shifting flux of cultural change. In effect, the critic becomes the custo-
dian and defender of good taste and cultural values.
Bv affirming the imitation of the classical writers and through them of
nature itself and by establishing the acceptable or standard criteria of poetic
la n e u a ce Pope grounds his criticism in both m im etic (imitation) and
rh eto ric (patterns of structure) literary theories. By the end of the 1700s,
however, a major shift in literary theory occurs.
W IL L IA M W O R D SW O R T H (1770-1850)
By the clo se of the eighteenth century, the world had w itnessed several
m ajo r p o litical rebellions, am ong them the A m erican and French
R evolutions, along with extreme social upheavals and prominent changes in
ph ilosophical thought. During this time, a paradigm atic shift occurred in
how people viewed the world. Whereas the eighteenth century valued order
and reason, the emerging nineteenth-century worldview emphasized intu
ition as a proper guide to truth. The eighteenth-century mind likened the
w orld to a great machine, with all its parts operating harmoniously, but in
the nineteenth century, the world was perceived as a living organism that
C h a p te r 2 A H istorical S u rv ey of L iterary C riticism 35
aS a 'h tT r ,th rOWir 8 a n u e ,e r n a " y b o o m in g . For the rationalistic m ind of

f rn S ta n d a rH rUry' a h UScd ,he nters of art and literature and
sa . * S, btsie. In contrast, the emerging nineteenth-century
c t z e n saw rura places as fundamental, as the setting in which a person
cou , is c o v e t e inner self. Devaluing the empirical and rationalistic
met o t e previous century, the nineteenth-century thinker
be leve a ru cou d be attained by tapping into the core of our humanity
or our transcendental natures, best sought in our original or natural setting.
bu ch rad icai ch anges found their spokesperson in W illiam W ordsworth.
Born m C o ck erm o u th , C u m berland shire, and raised in the Lake D istrict of
E ngland W ord sw orth com pleted his form al education at St. Joh n 's College,
C am b rid g e, in 1791. A fter com p letin g his grand tour of the C ontinent, he
p u b lish ed D escrip tiv e Sketches (1793), then m et one of his literary adm irers
and s o o n -to -b e frien d s and co au th o rs, Sam u el T. C olerid ge. In 1798
W ordsw orth and C olerid ge published Lyrical Ballads, a collection of poem s
that h erald ed the beg in n in g of British rom anticism . In the ensuing fifteen-
year p eriod , W ordsw orth w rote m ost of his best poetry, including Poems in
Two V olum es (1807), The Excursion (1814), M iscellaneous Poems (1815), and The
P relu de (1850 ). B u t it is L yrical Ballads that ushers in the R om antic age in
English literatu re and shifts the focus of both literary theory and criticism .
In an exp lan atory preface w ritten as an introduction to the second edi
tion of Lyrical B allads, W ordsw orth espouses a new vision of poetry and the
beg in n in g s of a radical change in literary theory. His purpose, he notes, is "to
choose incid en ts and situations from com m on life, and [. . .] describe them in
language really used by [people] in situations [. . .] the m anner in w hich we
associate id eas in a state of excitem en t." Like A ristotle, Sidney, and Pope,
W ordsw orth concerns him self w ith the elem ents and subject m atter of litera
ture b u t ch an g es the em phasis: Com m on men and wom en people his poetry,
not k in g s, q u e e n s, and aristo cra ts, becau se in "h u m b le and ru stic life ,"
W ordsw orth asserts, the poet finds that "the essential passions of the heart
find a b etter soil in w hich they can attain their maturity, are less under re
straint, and sp eak a plainer and more em phatic language."
N ot only d o es W ordsw orth suggest a radical change in subject m atter
bu t he also d ra m a tica lly sh ifts the focus of poetry s proper language.
U n like P o p e an d h is p red ecesso rs, W ordsw orth chooses "lan g u ag e really
used by [p e o p le ]"-everyday speech, not the inflated poetic diction of heroic
couplets, com p licated rhym e schem es, and dense figures of speech placed in
the m ou th s o f the typical eighteenth-century character. W ordsworth s rus-
" c h as M ic h a e l and Luke in his poetic narrative "M ich ael," speak in the
sim ple, everyd ay d ^ e' r^ s of p o etry 's su bject and language.
In a d d itio n to resh a p in g a e tocu ali ood poetry is the spontaneous
W ordsw orth red efines poetry its gid Da^ te< and Pope, who decree
o v e r flo w o f p o w e r f u l fe e lin g s . J d reaS o n e d , W o rd sw o rth n o w
th a t p o e t r y s h o u ld be r e s tr a in e d , c o n tr o lle d , a n d re a s o n e ,
highlights poetry's emotional quality. Although Wordsworth does not aban

don reason and disciplined thought, for him, the effective use of a passion-
filled imagination becomes the central characteristic of poetry.
In altering poetry's subject matter, language, and definition,
Wordsworth redefines the role of the poet. I he poet is no longer the pre
server of civilized values or proper taste, but he is a man speaking to men:
a man [. . .) endowed with more lively sensibility, more enthusiasm and
tenderness, who has a greater knowledge of human nature and a more
comprehensive soul than are supposed to be common among mankind."
Wordsworth's poet "has acquired a greater readiness and power in express
ing what he thinks and feels, and especially those thoughts and feelings
which, by his own choice, or from the structure of his own mind, arise in him
without immediate external excitement. Such a poet need no longer follow
a prescribed set of rules because this artist may now freely express his or her
own individualism, valuing and writing about feelings that are peculiarly
the artist's.
Because Wordsworth defines poetry as "the spontaneous overflow of
powerful feelings [. . .] [taking] its origin from emotion recollected in tran
quility," Wordsworth's new kind of poet cratts a poem by internalizing a
scene, circumstance, or happening and "recollects" that occasion with its
accompanying emotions at a later time when the artist can shape the remem
brance into words. Poetrv, then, is unlike bioloev or one of the other sciences
because it deals not with something that can be dissected or broken down
into its constituent parts, but primarily with the imagination and feelings.
Intuition, not reason, reigns.
"-fe n c e Pbv in s u c h p a .
have one J * * * > > * * * * * * , Wordsworth ,v r i 1
he would decide by his own f r ' V ls- that in judging these poems
W'hat will probablv be thn a^ &enuir>ely, and not b
readers re sp o n d V V r .W .h hope, that I
who would freely dispense u-, . ns of 1 b Poems will not depend on critics
to rely on their own feelines irH r? v U'1tl0ns' VVordsworth desires his readers
the same emotions the poet feltwh ^ * i " n irru8 nations as thev g
tranquility" the subject or circu T ^ S3W and then later "recollected in
declares Wordsworth the nonr ar,.j crXes of the poem itself. Through poetry,
This subjective e x p e r i e S T * 1 , emotions.
rom the preceding centuries' m " nn^ emoôns leads Wordsworth away
and toward a new develoompn/'^'r1* '1nd dletrica! theories of criticism
which em phasizes the individual t**1 f^rary theory: the expressive school,
share in this individuality. Bv Pyl V the artist and the reader's privilege to
emotions and the imagination J T T * SUch individuality and valuing the
ays the foundation for English l? ^ lmate concems in poetry, Wordsworth
ary criticism and theory for both T ant,cism and broadens the scope of liter*
Y h the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Chapter 2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism 37
PERCY BY SSH E SH ELLEY (1792-1822)
One of the strongest and most vocal voices of British Romanticism, Percy
Shelley was born in Sussex, England, in 1792, the eldest child of a wealthy
country squire. Educated at an academy in London, Shelley enrolled in
Oxford University, where he found intellectual companionship with Thomas
Jefferson Hogg (1792-1862), who became a lifelong friend. After mastering
the works of Plato and the writings of William Godwin (1756-1836), espe
cially Political Justice (1793), Shelley and Hogg authored a pamphlet titled
"The Necessity of Atheism," the contents of which resulted in Hogg's and
Shelley's expulsion from Oxford. Ironically Shelley was not an atheist, but
wanted to establish the right to debate the beliefs of Christianity.
Such disputes and quarrels with the establishment of both Church and
state followed Shelley the remainder of his life, including an unhappy mar
riage to Harriet Westbrook, an elopement with Mary Wollstonecraft
Godwin, and a variety of other events esteemed disgraceful by Britain's citi
zenry. Yet Shelley produced some of the best known Romantic poems
"Ozymandias" (1817), "O de to the West Wind" (1819), and "A donais"
(1821), to name a few and a pivotal text of literary criticism, A Defence o f
Poetry (1821), written in response to a whimsical attack on Romantic poetry
by Thomas Love Peacock (1785-1866), a good friend of Shelley's and a poet,
essayist, and scholar in his own right.
Of all the Romantic poets, Shelley, by far, is the greatest devotee of Plato,
embracing Plato's beliefs and establishing himself as the voice of
Neoplatonism in British Romanticism. In A Defence o f Poetry, Shelley's in
debtedness to Plato quickly becomes obvious. Shelley, for example, adopts
and adapts Plato's concept of the Ideal Forms, the belief that all things
around us are merely representations or shadows of Truth, of the Ideal
world, and of spiritual reality what Plato names The One. Shelley blends
Plato's concept of spiritual reality with his own understanding, asserting
that poetry is by far the best way to gain access to the Forms and to ultimate
Truth. Disavowing Neoclassicism's allegiance to order and reason, Shelley
emphasizes the individual and the imagination. For Shelley, Plato's Forms
intertwine with the Romantic ideal of the imagination. In his poetic craft, po
etry is less concerned with reason and rationality and more concerned about
the spiritual and the transcendental. Now the imagination and the emotions,
not didactic structural elements, become center stage in interpreting a text,
with Shelley redefining poetry as "the expression of the imagination." For
him, "poetry is . . . that from which all spring, and that which adorns all; and
that which if blighted, denies the fruit and the seed, and withholds from the
barren world the nourishment and succession of the scions of the tree of
hfe " Poetry is not only an outstanding art form, but a teacher and a guide to
ruth, one embodied in nature and the individual, not in science or reason or
Philosophy. Shelley believes that philosophy and history stem from poetry,
e,tr:nr niare to these disciplines. And poets, the

with poetry occupying s \ f \jfe: architects, painters, musi-
crafters of poetry, are tound in all waiKS oi r
i e X s , l * lawmakers. If true to fheir craft, p . s w.U lead people
toward Truththe Truth of the spiritual nature of ultimate reality and of
Plato's The Oneopening the minds of their readers to the unseen beauty all
around them. T . .
For Shelley, there is nothing more sacred and perfect than poetry. In his
creative theory, the poet is the greatest among all the various kinds of
artists because the poet alone can see the future in the present and, as
Shelley notes, participates in the eternal, the infinite, and the one," be
coming more than just an ordinary person. His passion for both the poet
and poetry and their role in the world as teacher and prophet who can lead
us to ultimate Truth represents a paradigmatic shift in thought from the
Age of Reason or Neoclassicism to British Romanticism, a new direction in
literary criticism that profoundly affects literary theory and criticism to
this, our present age.
HIPPOLYTE ADOLPHE TAINE (1828-1893)
Wordsworth's romanticism, with its stress on intuition as a guide to ultimate

truth and its belief that emotions and the imagination are the essential ele
ments of good poetry, dominated literature and literary criticism throughout
the first three decades of the nineteenth century, and its influence still con
tinues today. With the rise of the Victorian era in the 1830s, reason, science,
and a sense of historical determinism began to supplant Romanticism's em
phasis on intuition and the imagination as avenues to truth The growing
sense of historical and scientific determinism found its authoritative voice
and culminating influence in Charles Darwin and his text On the Origin of
Species(1859). Humankind was now demystified because we now knew our
origins and understood our physiological development. Science it seemed,
had provided us with the key to our past and an understanding of the pres
ent and would help us determine our future if we relied on the scientific
method in all our human endeavors.
Science's methodology, its philosophical assumptions, and its practical
applications found an admiring adherent and a strong voice in French histo
rian and literary critic Hippolyte A. Taine. Born in Vouziers, France,
Hippolyte Taine was a brilliant but unorthodox student at the EcoleNormale
Supericure in Paris. After finishing his formal education, he taught in vari
ous schools throughout France, continuing his investigations in both aes
thetics and history. During the 1850s, he published various philosophical
and a e s th e tic treatises, but his chief contribution to literary criticism and his
tory is his text the History of English Literature, published in 1864. In this work
Taine crystallizes what is now known as the historical approach to literary

analysis. rr J
*n P ro d u ctio n to the History o f English Literature, Taine uses a scien
tific sim ile to explain his approach to literary criticism:
What is your first remark on turning over the great, stiff leaves of a folio, the
yellow sheets of a manuscripta poem, a code of laws, a declaration of
faith? This, you say, was not created alone. It is but a mould, like fossil shell,
an imprint, like one of those shapes embossed in stone by an animal which
lived and perished. Under the shell there was an animal, and behind the
document there was a man. Why do you study the shell, except to represent
to yourself the animal? So do you study the document only in order to know
the [person].
For Taine, a text is like a fossil shell that naturally contains the likeness of its
inhabiter, who in this case is the author. To study only the text (e.g., discov
ering its date of composition or the accuracy of its historical references or
allusions) without considering the author and his or her inner psyche would
result in an incomplete analysis. An investigation of both the text and the
author, Taine believes, would result in an accurate understanding of the
literary work.
Taine asserts that to understand any literary text, we must examine the
environmental causes that joined together in its creation. He divides such
influences into four main categories: race, milieu, moment, and dominant
faculty. By race, Taine posits that authors of the same race, or those born
and raised in the same country, share peculiar intellectual beliefs, emo
tions, and ways of understanding. By examining each author's inherited
and learned personal characteristics, Taine believes we will then be able to
understand more fully the author's text. In addition, we must also examine
the author's milieu or surroundings. English citizens, he asserts, respond
differently to life than do French or Irish citizens. Accordingly, by examin
ing the culture of the author, Taine proposes that we would understand
more fully the intellectual and cultural concerns that inevitably surface in
an author's text. Further, Taine maintains that we must investigate an au
thor's epoch or m om ent that is, the time period in which the text was
written. Such information reveals the dominant ideas or worldview held
by people at that particular time and, therefore, helps us identify and un
derstand the literary characters' actions, motivations, and concerns more
fully than if we did not have such information. Finally, Taine decrees we
must examine each au th or's individual talents or dom inant faculty that
makes him or her different from others who share similar characteristics of
race, milieu, and moment. For Taine, a work of art is "the result of given
causes" and can best be represented by using the following formula: race +
milieu + moment + dominant faculty = work of art. Taine argues that we
40 Chapter 2 A Historical Survey of l iterary Criticism
cannot appreciate art as it "really" is without considering all four of these
stated elements.
MATTHEW ARNOLD (1822-1888)
In the "Preface to Lyrical Ballads," Wordsworth declares that "poetry is the

breath and S e r spirit of all knowledge; it is the impassroned expression
S S S is the countenance of all science." Such a lofty statement concerning
the nature and role of poetry finds an advocate m Matthew Arnold, the self
appointed voice for English Victorianism (1837-1901), the literary epoch im-
mediately following Wordsworth and Shelley s Romanticism.
Born during the Romantic era, Matthew Arnold was the son of an
English educator. Following in his family's tradition, Arnold attended
Oxford University, and upon graduation accepted a teaching position at
Oriel College. He spent most of his professional life (nearly thirty-five years)
as an inspector of schools. By age thirty-five, he had already written the ma
jority of his poetry, including "Dover Beach (1851)/' "The Scholar-Gipsy
(1853)," and "Sohrab and Rustum (1853)," some of his most famous poems.
During Arnold's early career, reactions against Romanticism and its ad
herents arose. Writers, philosophers, and scientists began to give more cre
dence to empirical and rationalistic methods for discovering the nature of
their world rather than to Romantic concepts of emotion, individualism, and
intuition as pathways to truth. With the publication of Charles Darwin's On
the Originof Species in 1859 and the writings of philosopher and sociologist
Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) and German theologian and philosopher David
Friedrich Strauss (1808-1874), science seemingly usurped the place of
Romanticism's "religion of nature" and the beliefs of most other traditional
religions. At the same time, philosophy became too esoteric and therefore
less relevant as a veh.de for understanding reality for the average Victorian
Into this void stepped Arnold, proclaiming that poetry can provide the nec-
essary truths, values, and guidelines for society. r
Fundamental to Arnold's literary criticism is his reapplication of classi
cal criteria to literature. Quotes and borrowed ideas from Plato Aristotle
Longinus, and other classical writers pepper his criticism. From Aristotle's
Poetics, for example, Arnold adapts his idea that the best poetrv is of a
"higher truth and seriousness" than history-or any other human subject
or activity, for that matter. Like 1 lato, Arnold believes that literature re
flects the society in which it is written and heralds its values and concerns.
Like Longinus, he attempts to define a classic decreeing that such a work
belongs to the "highest or best class. And in support of many of his
other ideas, he cites the later "classical writers such as Dante, Shakespeare,
and Milton.
Chaj. ttr 2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism 41
For A rnold, p o e t r y -n o t religion, science, or p h ilo so p h y -is hu-

mankind s crow ning activity. He notes, "More and more |human|kind wdl
discover that vve have to turn to poetry to interpret life for us, to console us,
to sustain us. Without poetry, our science will appear incomplete; and most
of what now passes with us for religion and philosophy will be replaced by
poetry. In the best of this poetry, he declares, we find "in the eminent de
gree, truth and serio u sn ess." Equating "seriousness" with moral excel
lence, Arnold asserts that the best poetry can and does provide standards
of excellence, a yardstick by which both Arnold and his society should
judge themselves.
In his pivotal essays The Function of Criticism at the Present Time"
(1865) and The Study of Poetry ' (1888), Arnold crystallizes his critical po
sition. Like Plato s critic, Arnold reaffirms but slightly amends the social
role of criticism: to create "a current of true and fresh ideas." To accomplish
this goal, the critic must avoid becoming embroiled in politics or any other
activity that would lead to a form of bias, for the critic must view society
disinterestedly, keeping aloof from the world's mundane affairs. In turn,
such aloofness will benefit all society because the critic will then be able to
pave the way for high culture a prerequisite for the poet and the writing of
the best poetry.
How, then, may the best poetry be achieved or discovered? By estab
lishing objective criteria w hereby we can judge whether any poem con
tains or achieves, in Aristotelian terms, "higher truth or seriousness." The
critic's task is "to have always in one's mind lines and expressions of the
great masters, and to apply them as a touchstone to other poetry." By com
paring the newly written lines to classical poems that contain elements of
the "sublime," the critic will instantly know whether a new poem is good
or bad.
In practice, such apparent objectivity in criticism becomes quite subjec
tive. Whose judgments, for example, shall we follow? Shall lines written by
Homer and Dante be considered excellent? How about Sidney's or even
Aristophanes'? Need the critic rank all past poets in an attempt to discover
who is great and who is not in order to create a basis for such comparisons
and value judgments? And whose moral values shall become the yardstick
by which we judge poetry? Arnold's only?
Such "objective" touchstone theory redefines the task of the literary
critic and introduces a subjective approach in literary criticism. No longer
just being the interpreter of a literary work, the critic now functions as an au
thority on values, culture, and tastes. This new literary "w atchdog must
guard and defend high culture and its literature while simultaneously defin
ing what high culture and literature really are.
Decreeing the critic to be the preserver of society's values and poetry to
be its most important activity, Arnold became the recognized spokesperson
for Victorian England and its literature. Even modern-day literary criticism
42 Chapter 2 A. Historical Survey of Literary Criticism
w p e r e d with some of his distinct

Warn and pntpagate the best that has been known and t h o u g , to see the
Obtect as m i t U it really is. "culture and anarchy, a r f >'=;
cite a few. By talcing Wordsworth's concept of the poet one step further,
Arnold separated berth the critic and the poet from sooety m order to create
a type of poetry and criticism that could supposed y rescue socie y rom 1 s
baser elements and preserve its most noble characteristics. Opposed by some
modem critics whose analyses stop short of considering literary criticism of
the previous two centuries, Arnold's criticism serves as either a rallying
point or a standard of opposition by which theorists can now measure their
own critical statements. More than any other critic, Arnold helps establish
culture" and, in particular, literature as the highest object of veneration
among civilized peoples.
HENRY JA M ES (1843-1916)
While Arnold was decreeing how poetry would rescue humanity from its
baser elements and would help lead us to truth, literary works were also
being written in other genres, particularly the novel. Throughout both the
Romantic and Victorian eras, for example, people in England and America
were reading such works as Withering Heights (1847), Vanity Fair (1848),
The House of the Seven Gables (1851), and Great Expectations (1860-61). Few
were providing for either the writers or the readers of this genre a body of
criticism comparable to that continually being formulated for poetry. As
Henry James notes in his critical essay The Art of Fiction" (1884), the
English novel had no air of having a theory, a conviction, a consciousness
of itself behind itof being the expression of an artistic faith, the result of
choice and comparison." It was left to James himself to provide us with
such a theory. r
Born in New York City in 1843, Henry James enjoyed the privileges of
education, travel, and money. Throughout his early life, he and his family
(including his brother William, the founder of American pragmatic philoso
phy) traveled to the capitals of Europe, visiting the sites and meeting the
leading writers and scholars of the day. Having all things European early
injected into his life and thought, James believed he wanted to be a lawyer
and enrolled in Harvard Law School. Quickly discovering that writing, not
law, captivated him, he abandoned law school for a career in writing, by
1875, the early call of Europe on his life had to be answered, and James, a
bachelor for life, settled permanently in Europe and began in earnest his
writing career.
Noted for his short storiesThe Real Thing" (1892), The Beast in the
Ju n g le" (1903), and The Jolly Corner" (1908), to name a few and his
n0l e^ QJ ie (187 ' The P rtrail 0 fa 0880-81), Bostonians

(1885 - 88 ) and TheTurn o f the Screw (1898), among others-Jam es's favo
theme is the conflict he perceives between Europe and America. The seasoned
aristocracy with its refined manners and taste is often infiltrated in his sto
ries by the naive American who seemingly lacks refined culture and discern
ment. Though a very involved practicing writer, James was also concerned
with developing a theory of writing, particularly for the novel. Indeed, in his
critical essay The Art of Fiction, he provides us with the first well-articulated
theory of the novel in English literature.
In "The Art of Fiction," published in a book of critical essays titled Partial
Portraits (1888), James states that "a novel is in its broadest definition a per
sonal, a direct impression of life: that, to begin with, constitutes its value,
which is greater or less according to the intensity of the impression"; fur
thermore, "the only obligation to which in advance we may hold a novel,
without incurring the accusation of being arbitrary, is that it be interesting.
The ways in which it is at liberty to accomplish this result [are] innumer
able." From the start, James's theory rejects the romantic notion of either
Wordsworth or Coleridge that the readers suspend disbelief while reading a
text. For James, a text must first be realistic, a representation of life as it is
and one that is recognizable to its readers. Bad novels, declares James, are
either romantic or scientific; good novels show us life in action and, above all
else, are interesting.
Bad novels, James continues, are written by bad authors, whereas good
novels are written by good authors. Unlike weak authors, good writers are
good thinkers who can select, evaluate, and imaginatively utilize the "stuff
of life" (i.e., the facts or pictures of reality) in their work. These writers also
recognize that a work of art is organic. The work itself is not simply the
amassing of realistic data from real-life experiences but has a life of its own
that grows according to its own principles or themes. Writers must acknowl
edge this fact and distance themselves from directly telling the story.
Shunning the omniscient, third-person narrator as a vehicle for telling a
story, James asserts that a more indirect point of view is essential so the au
thor shows characters, actions, and emotions to readers rather than telling us
about them. By showing rather than telling us about his characters and their
actions, James believes that he creates a greater illusion of reality than if he
were to present his story through one point of view or one character.
Ultimately James declares that the reader must decide the worth of the text,
and nothing of course, will ever take the place of the good old fashion lik-
iHg of a work of art or not liking it: the most improved criticism will not abol
ish that primitive, that ultimate test."
j Thanks to Henry James, the genre of the novel becomes a respectable
]Opic for literary critics. With his emphasis on realism and "the stuff of
lebat^meS E l a t e s a theory of fiction that is still discussed and
ofUte^Critie>sm
.,1sur^y
. i . AH's'r a , i_ijs vjorld, that was successfully defended in 1946 but not published
a" .. w 6 8 and The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin (edited,
uteraly_______
daV literary theorist, Mikhail __ luitui
Bakhtin Unt's|ated, and published in 1981). Since Bakhtin's death in 1975, many other
,dern-day
-.ther modem-aay himself^pieseiv
_ lliP Bakhtin...............
, because represent
represent. tran* bes and essays have been translated and published, but the core of his
theory
ir,th o n ^ y ' rary 'he r^ L t stc. Bakhtin
Bakhtin hashas been
been dubbed
dubbed! sPe* istic and literary theories can be discovered in the earlier works.
a
l
rhaps"1. p ^ n t-J ^ ' peS and me * iteI. a semiotician, an artist
a
'^ C e n tra l to Bakhtin's critical theory is the concept of the dialogic.
rding to Bakhtin, all language is a dialogue in which a speaker and a
^ pWadf,nic dlSa ph'los0ptlfterarv ... rary historian,
nisw* ****/--------------
an ethicist,- **'*
and a cul-
c
''er>e 1 historian' F foe, a3 llte ,u most
\ the mnst original ACC e r form a relationship. Language is always the product of at least
guisb a * ; a Marxist cn ne of original thinkers
thinkers nf of ithe
ie is ont: llsteneople in a dialogue, not a monologue. And it is language that defines
tW P individuals. Our personal consciousness consists of the inner con-
, ,.Hte attention during his lifetime, except
us as . we have only in our heads, conversations with a variety of
mtiethcen,u7. htin received htt Russia, 10 a m,ddle-class famiW,
' ironically. Bax ^ Rnrn VefSa that are significant for us. Each of these voices can respond in new
B,1 ,r years. Bo' " m D before
' Pssa _______ ,,lr^,y in
moving to Peirnarad
Petrograd to study
Vdexciting ways, developing who we are and continually helping shape
haps m nis yilnius and uoe Leaving the university without
ditin grew P f st Petersburg m ^ Nevel then to Vitebsk, where an we become. In one very real sense, no individual can ever be
" mpletely understood or fully known. That any person always has the
:he UrUVt e studies, he hen, ^ L bsk, he was surrounded by a group of Cpabiiity to change or never fully be known in this world Bakhtin labels
np^hng*' h00iteachet At V !tural influences of the Russian
worked,fwho addressed the s o c i a l ^ Today tWs group of scholars, in. unfinalizability. . ,
Because Bakhtin posits that all language is a dialogue, not monologic, he
ellectua rule under Josep v N Voloshinov, is known as the
, the term heteroglossia (a translation of the Russian word raznorecie,
Takhhn, F N- Medvedev and U n in g rad . Here Bakhtin
Waning "other or different tongues" or "multiianguagedness") to demon
LMin Circle. By 1924,t h e f P(p teomyelitis in his leg) and his lackol strate the multiplicity of languages that operate in any given culture.
J J e d financially as ^g'prevented him from finding work. In 1929 he Bakhtin thus expands the traditional definition of the word language from
oper political credentials pre _it .ns -n the underground Russian
being defined only as the spoken tongue of a given, cultural people. For
as arrested for supposedly P Psiberia for ten years, he appealed his Bakhtin, all forms of social speech that people use in their daily activities
rthdox Church.S.-ntenceakeninR physical condition and was then sen-
constitute heteroglossia. Professors speak one way while lecturing to their
S s U ^ o f t ^ a i e x U e m ^ - ^ bookkceper then as a classes, another to their spouses, another to their friends, another to the clerk
at the store, another to the server at a restaurant, and another to the police of
Throughout the 1930s, Bak c in Saransk, moving often to
ficer who gives the professor a speeding ticket. Each individual speech act is
acher at Mordovia State e varioUs political purges. In 1938his a dialogic utterance that is oriented toward a particular listener or audience,
icape further imprisonment R , to be amputated. Although he
demonstrating the relationship that exists between the speaker and listener.
omyelitis advanced, causing R f 8 his scholarly work dramatically
;as plagued with pain for the ms of h alite, tas defended h s doe In his essay "Discourse in the Novel" (1935), Bakhtin applies his ideas
nproved after the amputation. In And from the late 1940s w directly to the novel. He believes that the novel is characterized by
aral dissertation on Rabelais and hi ' ordov Pedagogical lnsti^ dialogued heteroglossia. Within the novel, multiple world views and a va
lis retirement in 1961, Bakhtin taught at me Russian acade riety of experiences are continually dialoguing with each other, resulting in
l o w ! University of Saransk. In the latter part of the W5 ^ ^ rnulnple imeractions, some of which are real and others of which are imag-
nics and scholars were once again mtere producin!, a new edition comment Uf 1 6 cBaracters utterances are indeed im portant, it is the
han surprised to discover that he was stlU aU . , jtlonal works on R a*!. important FoTthm^ h utterances, Bakhtin asserts, that are the most
nis 1929 study of Dostoevsky along with ^ the "poster sch relationships form m t . eSe utterances- A verse voices and interactions and
and the Renaissance culture, Bakhtin qui<*jy 0f his mam* P svageof the text possesê^savs^khP Unity, W hatever m eanmg the lan-
for Russian scholarship. After his death m l , h*^self. Bv the speaker nor in the text K V Y BaPhtm' resdes not in the intention of the
became available, few being edited by the au found scholars
between the listeneôr r e a l T f " , betWeen the SPeaker or writer, or
and '90s, Bakhtin was regarded as one of the most p occurring, for even withjnt . uch dialogized heteroglossia is continually
twentieth century. , bis first work, Uais Process Bakhtin calls hybridization W different languages clash,
His most renowned academic writings inc u e j-ssertation' 1
Dostoevsky's Poetics (1929, 2nd ed., 1963); his doctora
. rarv CntK'sm Chapter 2 A Historical Survey of Literary Criticism 47
al Survey of Uterafy
,.AHi***
Chapter i Is, especially those written by diversified, with no one voice speaking ex cathedra or no one theory tena
ciously held by all. At the end of the nineteenth century, most critics em pha
Bakhtin maintains that some nove,.,
Dostoevsky, am polyphonic. In nonpolyphonic novels, the auth sized either a biographical or a historical approach to texts. Using Tam e's
o f the novel while writing the novel's beginning r ^W s historical interests in a text and H enry Jam es's newly articulated theory of
' ns and choices' a" d the au th or a[ shoe ^ riter the novel, many critics investigated a text as if it w ere the embodiment of its
the end'"* 01 haracters' actions ai )Vel, the au th or's understand-
historical artifact. In the years that follow Arnold and Jam es, no
knows all the c (ure. in this . ln
>rk. In aa p
\olyphonic novel, there is author or a .
the work's entire hlblted m the w nor is the text a work- sinele, universally recognized voice d om inates literary theory. Instead,
............. anding of truth. The truth ol b distinctive literary
many literarv voices give rise to a host of differing and exciting
no overall out , worldview or ur _ -----,cr'trviKinPSSPS nf thp an. ways to examine a text
What follows in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries is a variety of
out1i * ,he f novel is an activeerters,
cre iu iv n
creation in for genuine surprises for all
allowing
the
v* polyphonic nuv*. ... schools of criticism, with each school asking legitimate and relevant but dif
thor, the readers, and the characters, der, and ch aractersinteract as ferent questions about a text. Most of these schools abandon the h olistic
concerned. All participantsauthor, reader, and
for tru th ch aracters
requires a plurality of
equals in creating the novel's "tru th," . . . ,nteractas approach to literary study, which investigates, analyzes, and interprets all
elements of the artistic situation in favor of con centrating on one or m ore
c nature of the novel implies that there are specific aspects. For exam p le, m od ern ism (an d , in p articu lar, th e N ew
consciour.. -
nsciousnesses.
For Bakhtin, the polyphonic no. - - - * *---____
nv truths not just one. Each character speaks and thinks his or her own Criticism, the first critical m ovem ent of the tw entieth cen tu ry ) w ishes to
truth Although one truth may be preferred to others by a character, a reader, break from the past, deem phasizing the cultural and historical influences
the author, no truth is particularly certain. Readers w atch as one character that may affect a work of literature. The text, these critics declare, will inter
oinfluences
r r, and traders listen to the m ultitude of voices heard by
anoint th ese...... .. -- What develops,
pret the text. On the other hand, Cultural Poetics, a school of criticism that
first appeared in the 1980s and continues to develop its u nd erlyin g assu m p
each character as ,h .
says Bakhtin, is a carnivalistic atmosphere, a sense oi
* * !
-------- ,
tions and methodologies, argues that m ost critics' h istorical consciousness
i.uii'Kmost significant contributions to literary' must be reawakened because, in reality, the fictional text and its historical
? of Bakhtin's most significant u .... _____ avo|c
?l's polyphonic style, especially the novels and cultural milieu are am azingly sim ilar. F o r th ese critic s, a re a d e r can
theory ana neips UWv.--- Bakhtin, have a carnival sense of never fully discern the truth about a historical o r a literary te x t since tru th
of Dostoevsky. Polyphonic novels, asserts voices are simultane-
the world, a sense of joyful abandonment where many voices aiv ^ itself is perceived differently from one era to another. F o r those w h o esp ouse
ouslv heard and directly influence their hearers. Each participant tests both the principles of Cultural Poetics, the text-o n ly critic ism of th e e a rly an d
-----. k-
iii;o; c0 f other
the ideas and the lives participants, creating a somewhat seriocomic mid-twentieth century appears biased and incom plete.
In the remaining chapters of this book, w e will exam in e the m o st p ro m i-
environment.
Bakhtin's interest in language, culture, literature, religion, anu of1 , 1S f twf nheth~ and tw en ty -first-cen tu ry in terp retatio n . F o r each
compasses much of contem porary literary theory' and criticism. His ideas ine thSe , 1,VerSe schools' we wiU note the tenets of the p h ilo so p h y u n d erlv -
become starting points for conversations and dialoguesItural
various contem porary cu 1
among -1
compel
theories-
^ t e S 1* M St' if n 0t a" ' h av e b rrOWed d e a s' P ciP 'e s. and
have
and often conflicting voices in amine closely w h a f h W th co ries already d iscu sse d . W e will e x-
ing
theY amend, and what m*3 ? theSe paSt sch o o ls of criticism , w h a t
historical development Cept;\they a d d - W e w ill a lso n o te e a c h sch o o l's
and its m J L ___- _ f
cw, ulW llg c
w orkin g assu m p tio n s, its p a rticu la r v o ca b u la ry ,
and its methodology for interpreting
m o d er n l it e r a r y c r it ic is m g texts. By so d o in g , w e w ill b e co m e in
formed about literary theorists and
1 a text. critics w h o articu late clearly o u r an aly ses
n 1916) marks a tran* m ând to a lesser d egree H enry Jamess dea
and Wordsworth befnr pcnod 'n literary criticism . Like Dryden, PP*'
ing Itterary critic of a 'm' ^ rno*d w as th e recognized authority and tJ
tbe major ideas of hi< * ^ 's theories arid criticism that ettl j
01 h'S Pra' Wl* the passing
oaf A
b rrn
o aold , the
d tim p ^ o morW
e period 1 j J.
any one person or set of ideas representing a -wforpro^,0$
v 0 ice vie r , alV
mrw/ompnl
movement ends, although
although Bakhtin
Bakhtin ss concerns
w . - - - a e c0 tne cpUnte^
s1
After Arnold, literary theory and criticism
R u ssia n f o r m a l i s m a n d New
C riticism
l he essential sInii line of a i>oern fas distingui''hed from the rational or logical
stria h u e of the statement whit It weabstrai t twin it) resembles that of architec
ture 01 fhiinting: it is a />altern of resolved stresses.
Cleanth Brooks, The Well Wrought Urn. Chapter 11
IN TRO D U CTIO N
v the end the nineteenth century, no >in^;lc* school of criticism domi

B nated literary studies. For the most part, literary criticism was not even
considered an academic activity. Academic research was more frequently than
not governed by psychological or sociohistorical principles that attempted to
show that a literary work was a social or political product encased in a partic
ular history. Some scholars who rejected this view espoused a theory' that ex
ulted the author, claiming a text to be the personal impressions and visions of
its creator, a place where the author and the reader can imaginatively revel in
the text and perhaps communicate with each other. And still others declared
that a literary work should be read biographically, seeing the author's life and
private concerns peeping throughout the text. But in the early part of the twen
tieth century, a radical break occurred in these traditional ways of interpreta
tion with the emergence of a group of Russian scholars who articulated a set of
interpretive principles known as Russian Formalism.
RU SSIA N FO R M A LISM
In the middle of the second decade of the twentieth century, two distinct
groups of Russian scholars emerged in Moscow and Petrograd (St.
Petersburg) who would radically change the direction of literary theory and
criticism. Founded in 1915, the Moscow Linguistic Circle included in its
48
Chapter 3 Russian Formalism and New Criticism 49
practitioners such members ns Roman Jnkobson, Jan Mukarovsky, Peter

Bogatyrev, and G. O. Vinokur. The following year in Petrograd, the Society
for the Study of Poetic Language (OPOYAZ) was formed, including in its
membership Victor Shklovsky, Boris Hichenbaum, and Victor Vinogradov.
Although the adherents of both groups often disagreed concerning the prin
ciples of literary interpretation, they were united in their rejection of many
nineteenth-century assumptions of textual analysis, especially the belief that
a work of literature was the expression of the author's worldview and their
dismissal of psychological and biographical criticism as being irrelevant
to interpretation. These Russian scholars boldly declared the autonomy of
literature and poetic language, advocating a scientific approach to literary
interpretation. Literature, they believed, should be investigated as its own
discipline, not merely as a platform for discussing religious, political, socio
logical, or philosophical ideas. By radically divorcing themselves from previ
ous literary approaches and advocating new principles of hermeneutics,
these members of the Moscow Linguistic Circle and of the Society for the
Study of Poetic Language are considered the founders of modern literary
criticism, establishing what is known as Russian Formalism.
Coined by opponents of the movement to deprecate Russian
Formalism's supposedly strict methodological approach to literary interpre
tation, the terms Form alism and F orm alist were first rejected by the Russian
Formalists themselves, for they believed that their approach to literature was
both dynamic and evolutionary, not a "form al" or dogmatic one.
Nevertheless, the terms ultimately became the battle cry for the establish
ment of what they dubbed a science of literature.
The first task of the Russian Formalists was to define their new science.
Framing their theory on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure, the French lin
guist and founder of modern linguistics, the Formalists emphasized the au
tonomous nature of literature. The proper study of literature, they declared, is
literature itself. To study literature is to study poetics, which is an analysis of
a work's constituent partsits linguistic and structural featuresor its form.
Form, they asserted, included the internal mechanics of the work itself, espe
cially its poetic language. It is these internal mechanics or what the Formalists
called devices that compose the artfulness and literariness of any given text,
not a work's subject matter or content. Each device or compositional feature
possesses peculiar properties that can, as in any science, be analyzed. For the
Formalists, this new science of literature became an analysis of the literary
and artistic devices that the writer manipulates in creating a text.
The Formalists' chief focus of literary analysis was the examination of a
text's literariness, the language employed in the actual text. Literary lan
guage, they asserted, is different from everyday language. Unlike everyday
speech, literary language foregrounds itself, shouting, Look at me; I am
special; I am unique." Through structure, imagery, syntax, rhyme scheme,
paradox and a host of other devices, literary language identifies itself as
R
uss
ian Formalistand New Criticism
Chaps . v cneech patterns, ultimately produc C hapter 3 Russian Form alism and New C riticism 51
deviations from ^ ervday
n e ss^fT e fa, .m
^ i'ia
: i ; arization.
riw tio n . Coined
Coined K,, b y "^ ^
dt
n g feature ofor literann *---
literariness, . fami|iarization is the proces. US$j BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN RUSSIAN FORMALISM
:ormahst Victor Shklovsky, defam iliarixation is th
itrange (ostranenie) the familiar,
rau***' o--f putting
* ~ thDe olH .^r
. CeSs ,ur
tight AND NEW CRITICISM
>hklovsky called a "* here of new perception. > R By> ^making
,r> news tra n ^ S
P (or what some Russian F o "aiKf.
rn ^ H Russian Formalism is sometimes paired with the first modern school of
Llamili^"0"
ation V '-'1 .. c
i down the act of perception of everyday vvord' ^|| , Anglo-American criticism: the New Criticism. Dominating both American
*T'll,ar' '~n{\slows - reader. to to reexamnu:
reexamine me the imaj
image. F0r ob. and British criticism from the 1930s to the 1950s, New Criticism can be con
['"fore** the words "dazzling darkness," ur atteXample sidered a second cousin of Russian Formalism. Although both schools em
Then we read in a t** pf ,hcse words. Our ordinary experi ploy some similar terminology and are identified as types of Formalism,
aught by the unusual pa down because we must now unpack the ^ there exists no direct relation between them. New Criticism has its own
evervdav language .s slow age whcn We do so. poetry wi,h > unique history and development in Great Britain and the United States.
ing of the author scht eaUed attention to itself as poetry and *
Interestingly, in the 1940s, two leading Russian Formalists, Roman Jakobson
companying poehc diet. n or readers to experience a small pa * and Rene Wellek, came to the United States and actively participated in the
literariness, allowing its 2 ^ the act of perception. oi scholarly discussions of the New Critics. The interaction of these Russian
^ i , world in a new . ,he constituent devices present in p0f Formalists with the New Critics does evidence itself in some of Russian
Formalism's ideas being mirrored in New Critical principles.
In addition to narrative prose and declared that the structure of'
Shklovsky also analy d^ {story) and syuzhet (p,ot) Fabu]a
narrative has.twoasp and can be considered somewhat akin to Z
raw material ottn outline contains the chronological series of APPLYING RUSSIAN FORMALISM TO A LITERARY TEXT
s o r Th" svu?.he. is the literary devices the writer u s ^
6 f 1 a story (the tabula) into plot. By using such techniques as dig** Read carefully the following poem by the contemporary American essayist,
transform a story di tions, the writer dramatically alters the fabula poet, scholar, and editor Mary M. Brown. After reading the text several times,
sums, surpr^t ^ literalure that now has the potential to provoke defamil' be able to apply, discuss, and demonstrate how the following terms from
Russian Formalism can be used in developing an interpretation of this text:
iari/atfon "to make strange" the language of the text and render a fresh
poetics
V iew ^ ^ ,lt" - *er-
arv theory is a reevaluation of the text itself. Bringing a sc.ent.fic approach to
form
dev ices
literary studies the Formalists redefined a text to mean a unified collection literariness
of various literary devices and conventions that can be objectively analyzed
foregrounding of literary language
Literature is not'thev declared, the vision of an author or authorial intent
defamiliarization.
Using linguistic principles, the Formalists asserted that literature, like all sci
ences, is a self-enclosed, law-governed system. To study literature is to study
a text's form and only incidentally its content. For the Formalists, form issu Early Spring A ubade
perior to content. The branches outside this office window
As a group, the Russian Formalists were suppressed and disbanded in too often block the light, but today the early
1930 by the Soviet government because they were unwilling to view litera
ture through the Stalinist regime's political and ideological perspectives. morning sun wavers, then prevails, stippling
Their influence did continue to flourish in Czechoslovakia through the work this space with a tentative dawn that crawls
of the Prague Linguistic Circle (founded in 1926, its leading figure being
toward an even more fragile day. All the failures
Roman Jakobson) and through the work of the Russian folktale scholar of my life on earth are erased in this quivering
Vladimir Propp. Fortunately for the advancement of literary theory and crit
icism, Russian Formalism resurfaces in the 1960s in French and American grace that works its lacy way through its own
structuralism (see Chapter 5). curious birth. This is the one appointed hour
52 Chapter 3 Russian Formalism and New Criticism
that comes and gives and goes againtoo soon-

the briefest visit, that leaves this faltering glow,
the gift of a faint, definite urging, the finest

power we haveso close, this close to Love.
Mary M. Brown
NEW CRITICISM
If Brown's poem "Early Spring Aubade" were taught in many high school or
introductory-level college literature courses, the instructor would probably
begin the discussion with a set of questions that contain most, if not all, of
the following: What is the meaning of the title? What is the title's relation
ship to the rest of the poem? Where is the office located in line 1? What is
the meaning of the word stippling in line 3? Are there other words in the text
that need to be defined? In line 4, how can the dawn "crawl toward an even
more fragile day"? What is the relationship that Brown establishes between
failures and grace? What kind of birth occurs in the poem? What is the gift re
ferred to in the penultimate line of the poem? How is Brown defining the
word Love in the poem's last line? What relationships between words or
concepts is Brown establishing in the text? What of the poem's physical
structure? Does the arrangement of the words, phrases, or sentences help
establish relationships among them? What is the poem's tone? How do you
know this is the tone, and what devices does Brown employ to establish this
tone? What tensions does Brown create in the poem? What ambiguities.
Does Brown successfully resolve these tensions by the poem's end? Based on
the answers to all of these questions, what does the poem mean? In other
words, what is the poem's form or its overall meaning?
Upon close examination of these discussion questions, a distinct patte*1'
or methodology quickly becomes evident. This particular interpretive mode
begins with a close analysis of the poem's individual words, including hot
denotative and connotative meanings, then moves to a discussion of psS1
ble allusions within the text. Following this discussion, the teacher/critic
searches for any patterns developed through individual words, phrases,
clauses, sentences, figures of speech, and allusions. The critic's sharp eY
also notes any symbols (either public or private) that represent something
else. Other elements for analysis include point of view, tone, and any o
poetic device that will help the reader understand the dramatic situatl j
After ascertaining how all the aforementioned information interrelates a ^
finally coalesces in the poem, the critic can then declare what the P
means. The poem's overall meaning or form depends almost solely #g
text in front of the reader. No library research, no studying of the aut 1
life and times, and no other extratextual information is needed, except, per
haps, a dictionary. The poem itself contains all the necessary information to
discover its meaning.
This method of analysis became the dominant school of thought and in
terpretative methodology during the first two-thirds of the twentieth cen
tury in most high school and college literature classes and in both British and
American scholarship. Known as New Criticism, this approach to literary
analysis provides the reader with a formula for arriving at the correct inter
pretation of a text usingfor the most partonly the text itself. Such a
formulaic approach gives both the beginning student of literature and acad
emicians a seemingly objective approach for discovering a text's meaning.
Using New Criticism's clearly articulated methodology, any intelligent
reader, say its adherents (called New Critics), can uncover a text's hitherto
so-called hidden meaning.
New Criticism's theoretical ideas, terminology, and critical methods are,
more often than not, disparaged by many present-day critics who them
selves are introducing new ideas concerning literary theory. Despite its cur
rent unpopularity, New Criticism stands as one of the most important
English-based contributions to literary critical analysis. Its easily repeatable
principles, teachableness, and seemingly undying popularity in the litera
ture classroom and in some scholarly journals have enabled New Criticism
to enrich theoretical and practical criticism while helping generations of
readers to become close readers of texts.
The term New Criticism came into popular use to describe this approach
to understanding literature with the 1941 publication of John Crowe
Ransom's The New Criticism, a wrork that contained Ransom's personal
analysis of several of his contemporary theorists and critics. Ransom him
self was a Southern poet, a critic, and one of the leading advocates of this
evolving movement. While teaching at Vanderbilt University in Nashville,
Tennessee, in the 1920s, Ransom, along with several other professors and
students, formed the Fugitives, a group of scholars and critics who believed
in and practiced similar interpretative approaches to a text. Other sympa
thetic groups, such as the Southern Agrarians (also in Nashville, Tennessee),
soon formed. In The New Criticism, Ransom articulates the principles of
these various groups and calls for an ontological critic, one who will recog
nize that a poem (used as a synonym in New Criticism for any literary
work) is a concrete entity, as is Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa or the score of
Handel's Messiah or any chemical element, such as iron or gold. Like these
concrete objects, a poem can be analyzed to discover its true or correct
meaning independent of its author's intention or of the emotional state, val
ues, or beliefs of either its author or its reader. Because this claim rests at the
center of the movement's critical ideas, it is not surprising that the title of
Ransom's book quickly became the official name for this approach to liter
ary analysis.
Called modernism, Formalism, aesthetic criticism, textual criticism, or

ontological criticism throughout its long and successful history, New
Criticism, like all schools of criticism, does not represent a coherent body of
critical theory and methodology espoused by its followers. At best, New
Criticism and its adherents (i.e., New Critics) are an eclectic group, each
challenging, borrowing, and changing terminology, theory, and practices
from one another while asserting a common core of basic ideas. Their ulti
mate unity stems from their opposition to the prevailing methods of literary
analysis found in academia in the first part of the twentieth century.
H ISTO RICA L DEVELOPM ENT
At the beginning of the twentieth century (often said to mark the start of
m o d e r n i s m or the modernist period), historical and biographical research
dominated literary scholarship. Criticism's function, many believed, was to
discover the historical context of a text and to ascertain how the authors'
lives influenced their writings. Such extrinsic analysis (examining elements
outside the text to uncover the text's meaning) became the norm in the liter
ature departments of many American universities and colleges. Other forms
of criticism and interpretation were often intermingled with this prominent
emphasis on history and biography. For example, some critics believed we
should appreciate the text for its beauty. For these impressionistic critics,
how we feel and what we personally see in a work of art are what really mat
ter. Others were more philosophical, arguing a naturalistic view of life that
emphasizes the importance of scientific thought in literary analysis. For ad
vocates of naturalism, human beings are considered animals who are caught
in a world that operates on definable scientific principles and who respond
somewhat instinctively to their environments and internal drives. Still other
critics, the New Humanists, valued the moral qualities of art. Declaring that
human experience is basically ethical, these critics demanded that literary
analysis be based on the moral values exhibited in a text. Finally, remnants of
nineteenth-century romanticism asserted themselves. For the romantic
scholar, literary study concerns itself with the artists' feelings, attitudes, and
personal visions exhibited in their works. Known as the expressive school,
this view values the individual artist's experiences as evidenced in a text.
Along with impressionism, the New Humanism, and naturalism, eX;
pressionism and its romantic view of life and art were rejected by the "Nnw
Criticsand thus their name: critics who reacted against these "old"
of criticism. In declaring the objective existence of the poem or text, the No
Critics assert that only the poem itself can be objectively evaluated, not t ^
feelings, attitudes, values, and beliefs of the author or the reader. Beca11^
they concern themselves primarily with an examination of the work *tse
and not its historical context or biographical elements, the New Critics be-
long to a broad classification of literary criticism called Formalism. Like the
Russian Formalists, the New Critics espouse what many call "the text and
text alone approach to literary analysis. Although the New Critics do indeed
investigate a text s historical content and an author's biographical, social,
and cultural concerns, their approach to textual analysis emphasizes a close
reading of the text itself. Both the Russian Formalists and the New Critics
believe that every text and indeed all literature is a complex, rule-governed
system of forms (literary devices) that are analyzable. Such an analysis will
reveal with considerable objectivity the text's meaning.
New Criticism 's approach to textual criticism automatically leads to
multiple and divergent views about the elements that constitute what the
New Critics call the poem. Because many of the practitioners of this formal
istic criticism disagree with each other concerning the various elements that
constitute a poem and also hold differing approaches to textual analysis, it is
difficult to cite a definitive list of critics who consider themselves New
Critics. We can, however, group together critics who hold to some of the
same New Critical assumptions of poetic analysis. Among this group are
John Crowe Ransom, Rene Wellek, William K. Wimsatt, Monroe Beardsley,
William Empson, R. R Blackmur, I. A. Richards, Robert Penn Warren, and
Cleanth Brooks. Thanks to the publication of the 1938 college text
Understanding Poetry: An Anthology for College Students by Brooks and
Warren, New Criticism emerged in American universities as the leading
form of textual analysis from the late 1930s until the early 1960s.
Although New Criticism dominated literary theory and criticism in the
1940s and 1950s, its roots stem from the early 1900s. Two British critics and
authors, T. S. Eliot and I. A. Richards, helped lay the foundation for this form
of formalistic analysis. From Eliot, New Criticism borrows its insistence that
criticism be directed toward the poem, not the poet. The poet, declares Eliot
in his best-known essay "Tradition and the Individual Talent" (1919), does
not infuse the poem with his or her personality and emotions, but uses lan
guage in such a way as to incorporate within the poem the impersonal feel
ings and emotions common to all humankind. According to Eliot, poetry is
not a freeing of the poet's emotions, but an escape from them. Because the
poem is an impersonal formulation of common feelings and emotions, the
successful poem unites the poet s impressions and ideas with those common
to all humanity, producing a text that is not simply a reflection of the poet's
personal feelings.
The New Critics also borrow Eliot's belief that the reader of poetry must
be instructed in literary technique. Eliot maintains that a good reader per
ceives a poem structurally, resulting in good criticism. Such a reader must
necessarily be trained in reading good poetry (especially the poetry of the
Elizabethans John Donne, and other metaphysical poets), and be well ac
quainted with established poetic traditions. A poor reader, on the other
hand, simply expresses his or her personal emotions and reactions to a text.
Such a reader is untrained in literary technique and craftsmanship.
Following Eliot's lead, the New Critics declare that there are both good and
bad readers or critics and good and bad criticism. A poor reader and poor
criticism may argue that a poem can mean anything its reader or its author
wishes it to mean. On the other hand, a good reader or critic and good criti
cism will assert that only through a detailed structural analysis of a poem
can a reader discover the correct interpretation of a text.
Eliot also lends New Criticism some of its technical vocabulary. Thanks
to Eliot, for example, the term objectiv e correlativ e has become a staple in
poetic jargon. According to Eliot, a writer can best express emotion through
art by devising what Eliot calls an objective correlative, or a set of objects, a
situation, a chain of events, or reactions that can effectively awaken in the
reader the emotional response the author desires without being a direct
statement of that emotion. When the external elements are thus effectively
presented in a poem, they coalesce, immediately evoking an emotion. The
New Critics readily adopted and advanced this indirect or impersonal the
ory of the creation of emotions in poetrv.
From Eliot's British contemporary 1. A. Richards, a psychologist, rhetori
cian, poet, and literary critic, New Criticism borrows a term that has become
synonymous with its methods of analysis, practical criticism. In an experi
ment at Cambridge University, Richards distributed to his students copies of
poems minus such information as the authors, dates, and oddities of spelling
and punctuation, and asked them to record their responses. From these data,
Richards identified the difficulties that poetry presents to its readers, includ
ing matters of interpretation, poetic techniques, and specific meanings. From
this analysis, Richards then devised an intricate system for arriving at a
poem's meaning, including a minute scrutiny of the text. It is this close
scrutiny or close reading of a text that has become svnonvmous with New
Criticism.
From Eliot, Richards, and other critics, New Criticism borrows, amends,
and adds its own ideas and concerns. Although few of its advocates would
agree on many tenets, definitions, and techniques, a core of assumptions
does exist, thereby allowing us to identify adherents of this critical approach
A SSU M PTIO N S
New Criticism beg,ns by assuming that the study of imaginative literature

valuable; to study poetry or any literary work is to engage oneself i" J
aesthetic expenence (,.e the effects produced on an individual when CO
templating a work of art) that can lead to truth. The truth discovers*
through an aesthete expenence is distinguishable from the truth that scien<
C. hap ter 3 Russian Formalism and Nrw Criticism 57
provides us. Science speaks propositionally, tolling us whether a statement is

demonstrably either true or false. Pure water, in the language of science,
freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit, not 30 or 31. Poetic truth, on the other hand,
involves the use of the imagination and intuition, a form of truth that, ac
cording to the New Critics, is discernable only in poetry. In the aesthetic ex
perience alone we are cut off from mundane or practical concerns, from mere
rhetorical, doctrinal, or propositional statements. Through an examination of
the poem itself, we can ascertain truths that cannot be perceived through the
language and logic of science. Both science and poetry, then, provide differ
ent but valid sources of knowledge and avenues to truth.
Similar to many other critical theories, New Criticism's theory begins by
defining its object of concern, in this case a poem. (New Critics use the word
poem synonymously with work o f art; however, their methodology works
most efficiently with poetry rather than any other genre.) New Critics assert
that a poem has ontological status that is, it possesses its own being and ex
ists like any other object. For the New Critics, a poem becomes an artifact,
that is, an objective, self-contained, autonomous entity with its own struc
ture. As William K. Wimsatt declares, a poem becomes a "verbal icon," or the
New Critical assumption that a work of art achieves its meaning through the
interrelationships of sound, texture, structure, rhetoric, and a host of other
literary devices.
Having declared a poem an object in its own right, the New Critics then
develop their objective theory of art. For them, the meaning of a poem must
not be equated with its author's feelings or stated or implied intentions. To
believe that a poem's meaning is nothing more than an expression of the pri
vate experiences or intentions of its author is to commit a fundamental error
of interpretation, which the New Critics call the intentional fallacy.
According to William K. Wimsatt and Monroe C. Beardsley, the New Critics
who coined this term, the design or intent of the author is neither available
nor desirable as a standard for judging a literary work. Along with many
other New Critics, Wimsatt and Beardsley believe that the poem is an object.
Any literary work is a public text that can only be understood by applying
the standards of public discourse, not simply the private experience, con
cerns, and vocabulary of its author. In their widely read New Critical text
Understanding Poetry, however, Cleanth Brooks and Robert Penn Warren
temper the dogmatism of the intentional fallacy, asserting that understand
ing the origin of a poem may indeed enhance its appreciation. They do insist,
however, that a poem's origin or historical setting must not be confused with
a close reading of the actual poem itself.
That the poem is somehow related to its author cannot be denied. In
"Tradition and the Individual Talent," Eliot states the New Critical position
on the relationship between the author and his or her work. The basis of
Eliot's argument is an analogy. We all know, he says, that certain chemical re
actions occur in the presence of a catalyst, an element that causes, but is not
affected by, the reaction. For example, if we place hydrogen peroxin

mon household disinfectant, in a clear bottle and expose it to the >m.
we will no longer have hydrogen peroxide. Acting as a ca ta ly st^ SraV$,
rays will cause a chemical reaction to occur, breaking down the h ** SUn's
peroxide into its various parts, while the sun's rays remain unaffected r 8cn
Similarly, the poet's mind serves as a catalyst for the reaction that
the poem. During the creative process, the poet's mind, serving as th ^'e^s
lyst, brings together the experiences of the author's personality (n^ * 3
author's personality traits or attributes), into an external object and^
creation: the poem. It is not the personality traits of the author that c a|nevv
to form the poem, but the experiences of the author's personality. In d'6^
guishing between the personality and the mind of the poet, Eliot assert hT
the created entity, the poem, is about the experiences of the author that ^
similar to all of our experiences. By structuring these experiences, the poe^
allows us to examine them objectively.
Dismissing the poet's stated or supposed intentions as a means of dis
covering the text's meaning, the New Critics give little credence to the bio
graphical or contextual history of a poem. If the intentional fallacy is correct
then unearthing biographical data will not help us ascertain a poem's mean
ing. Likewise, trying to place a poem in its social or political context will tell
us much social or political history about the time when the poem was au
thored. Although such information may indeed help in understanding the
poem's sociological or historical context, the poem's real meaning cannot re
side in this extrinsic or outside-the-text information.
Of particular importance to the New Critics is the etymology of individ
ual words. Because the words of a poem sometimes change meaning from
one time period to another, the critic often needs to conduct historical re
search, discovering what individual words meant at the time the poem was
written. For example, if a fifteenth-century poet called someone a "nice per
son," the New Critics would investigate the meaning of the word in
fifteenth-century usage, discovering that at that time nice meant foolish. The
Oxford English Dictionary (a dictionary that cites a word's multiple historical
meanings chronologically) becomes one of the New Critic's most used tools.
Placing little emphasis on the author, the social context, or a text's histor
ical situation as a source for discovering a poem's meaning, the New Critics
assert that a reader's emotional response to a text is neither important nor
equivalent to its interpretation. The New Critics call such an error in judg
ment the affective fallacy, a mistake in interpretation that confuses w h a t a
poem is (its meaning) with what it does. If we derive our standard of cut
cism, say the New Critics, from the psychological effects of the poem,wea
then left with impressionism or, worse yet, relativism, the belief that a pe
has innumerable valid interpretations. t)ie
Where, then, can we find or discover a poem's meaning? According f
New Critics, a poem's meaning does not reside in the author, the historic
s o cia l c o n t e x t c f t h e p o e m , o r e v e n in t h e r e a d e r . B e c a u s e t h e p o e m it s e lf is
an a r tifa c t o r a n o b je c t i v e e n tity , ,ts m e a n i n g m u s t r e s id e w ith in its o w n
structure, 1 1 \e poem itself. Like all other objects, a poem and its struc-
lure can be analyzed saent,f.cally. Accordingly, careful scrutiny reveals that
a poem s structure operates according to a complex series of laws. By
closely analyzing thts structure, the New Critics believe that they have de
vised a methodology and a standard of excellence that we can apply to all
poems to discover their correct meaning. It is the critic's job, they conclude,
to ascertain the structure of the poem, to see how it operates to achieve its
unity, and to discover how meaning evolves directly from the poem itself.
New Criticism sees the poet as an organizer of the content of human ex
perience. Structuring the poem around the often confusing and sometimes
contradictory experiences of life, the poet crafts the poem in such a way that
the text stirs its readers emotions and causes its readers to reflect on the
poem's contents. As an artisan, the poet is most concerned with effectively
developing the poem's structure because the artist realizes that the meaning
of a work emerges from its structure. The poet's chief concern, maintain the
New Critics, is how meaning is achieved through the various and sometimes
conflicting elements operating in the poem itself.
The chief characteristic of a poemand therefore of its structure is co
herence or interrelatedness. Borrowing their ideas from the writings of
Samuel T. Coleridge (Biographia Literaria, 1817), the New Critics posit the
organic unity of a poem that is, all parts of a poem are necessarily interre
lated, with each part reflecting and helping to support the poem's central
idea. Such organic unity allows for the harmonization of conflicting ideas,
feelings, and attitudes, and results in the poem's overall oneness. Superior
poetry, declare the New Critics, achieves such oneness through paradox,
irony, and ambiguity. Because such tensions are necessarily a part of every
one's life, it is only fitting and appropriate, say the New Critics, that superior
poetry presents these tensions while at the same time showing how they are
resolved within the poem to achieve the text s organic unity.
Because the poem's chief characteristic is its oneness, New Critics believe
that a poem's form and content are inseparable. For the New Critics, form is
more than the external structure of a poem; a poem's form encompasses and
simultaneously rises above the usual definition of poetic structure (i.e.,
whether or not the poem is a Shakespearean or Petrarchan sonnet, or a lyric,
or any other poetic structure having meter, rhyme, or some other poetic pat
tern). In New Criticism, form is defined as the overall effect the poem creates.
Because all the various parts of a poem combine to create this effect, each
poem's form is unique. When all the elements of a poem work together to
form a single, unified e ffe c t-th e poem's fo rm -N ew Critics declare that the
poet has written a successful or good poem, one that possesses organic unity.
Because all good and successful poems have organic unity, it would be
inconceivable to try to separate a poem's form and its content, maintain t e
New Critics. How can we separate what a poem says from how it Say
Because all the elements of a poem, both structural and aesthetic, work
gether to achieve a poem's effect or form, it is impossible to discuss the 0v*~
all meaning of a poem by isolating or separating form and content. Ver~
For the New Critic, it is also inconceivable to believe that a poem's inte
pretation is equal to a mere paraphrased version of the text. Labeling such^
erroneous belief the h e r e s y o f p a r a p h r a s e , a term coined by Cleanth Brook*
in his book The Well Wrought Urn, New Critics maintain that a poem is not
simply a statement that is either true or false, but a bundle of harmonized
tensions and resolved stresses, more like a ballet or musical composition
than a statement of prose. No simple paraphrase can equal the meaning of a
poem because the poem itself resists through its inner tensions any pr0se
statement that attempts to encapsulate its meaning. Paraphrases may help
readers in their initial understanding of a poem, but such prose statements
must be considered working hypotheses that may or may not lead to a true
understanding of the poem's meaning. The New Critics insist that such
paraphrased statements about a poem must never be considered equivalent
to the poem's structure or form.
M ETH O D O LO G Y
Believing in both the thematic and structural unity of a poem, New Critics
search for a poem's meaning within the text's structure by finding the tensions
and conflicts that must eventually be resolved into a harmonious whole and
that inevitably lead to the creation of the poem's chief effect. Such a search first
leads New Critics to the poem's diction or word choice. Unlike scientific dis
course with its precision of terminology, poetic diction often has multiple
meanings and immediately sets up a series of tensions within the text. For
example, many words have both a denotation, or dictionary meaning, and
connotation(s), or implied meanings. A word's denotation may be in direct
conflict with its connotative meaning determined by the context of the poem.
In addition, it may be difficult to differentiate between the various denotations
or connotations of a word. For example, if someone writes that "a fat head
enjoys the fat of the land," the reader must note the various denotative and
connotative differences of the word fa t. At the start of poetic analysis, then,
conflicts or tensions exist by the very nature of poetic diction. New Critics call
this tension ambiguity, or language's capacity to sustain multiple meanings-
At the heart of literary language or discourse, claim the New Critics, is ambigu
ity. At the end of a close reading of a text, all such ambiguities must be resolved.
Even a surface level of understanding or upon a first reading, a poem,
from a New Critic's perspective, is a reconciliation of conflicts, of oppose
meanings and tensions. Because a poem's form and content are indivisible, it
is the critic s task to analyze the poetic diction to ascertain such tensions.
Although various New Critics give a variety of names to the poetic elements
that make up a poem s structure, all agree that the poem's meaning is de
rived from the oscillating tensions and conflicts that are brought to the sur
face through the poetic diction.
For example, Cleanth Brooks claims that the chief elements in a poem
are paradox and irony, two closely related terms that imply that a word or
phrase is qualified or even undercut by its context. By definition, a paradox
is a seemingly self-contradictory statement that must be resolved on a higher
metaphysical level. The New Critics broaden this definition, maintaining
that literary language by its very nature is ambiguous. Literary discourse,
unlike normal or everyday language, is able to sustain multiple meanings.
For Brooks, the discourse of poetry is "the language of paradox." Similarly,
the New Critics enhance the meaning of the word irony. Irony is a figure of
speech in which the words express a meaning that is often the direct oppo
site of their literal meaning. In New Criticism irony is the poet's ability to
recognize incongruities, and it becomes New Criticism's master trope be
cause it is essential for the production of paradox and ambiguity. Some New
Critics use the word tension to describe the opposition or conflicts operating
within a text. For these critics, tension implies the conflicts between a word's
denotation and its connotation, between a literal detail and a figurative one,
and between an abstract and a concrete detail.
Because conflict, ambiguity, or tension controls the poem's structure, the
meaning of a poem can be discovered only by contextually analyzing the poetic
elements and diction. Furthermore, because context governs meaning, mean
ings of individual words or phrases are necessarily context related and unique
to the poem in which they occur. It is the task of the critic to unravel the various
apparent conflicts and tensions within each poem and ultimately to show that
the poem possesses organic unity, thereby demonstrating how all parts of the
poem are interrelated and support the poem's chief paradox. This paradox,
which New Critics often call form or overall effect, can usually be expressed in
one sentence that contains the main tension and the resolution of that tension. It
is this "key idea" to which all other elements of the poem must relate.
Although most New Critics would agree that the process of discovering
the poem's form is not necessarily linear (because advanced readers often
see ambiguities and ironies upon a first reading of a text), New Criticism
provides the reader with a distinct methodology to discover a text's central
paradox or tension. These guided steps allow both novices and advanced lit
erary scholars to enter the discussion of a text's ultimate meaning, each con
tributing to the poem's interpretation. From a New Critical perspective, one
begins the journey of discovering a text's correct or valid interpretation by
reading the poem several times and by carefully noting the work's title (if it
has one) and its relationship to the text. Then, by following the prescribed
steps listed here, the reader can ascertain a text's meaning. The more practice
Chapter 3 Russian Formalism and New Criticism
62
a reader has at follow ing this m ethodology and the m o re opportunities he

she has to be guided by an ad vanced read er and critic, th e m ore adept tfT
^ H p r will undoubtedly becom e at textual an alysis:
Step 1 Examine the text's diction. Consider the denotations, connotations, and
etymological roots of all words in the text.
Step 2 Examine all allusions found within the text by tracing their roots to the pri
mary text or source, if possible.
Step 3 Analyze all images, symbols, and figures of speech within the text. Note
the relationships, if any, among the elements, both within the same cate
gory (e.g., between images) and among the various elements (e.g., be
tween an image and a symbol).
Step 4 Examine and analyze the various structural patterns that appear within
the text, including the technical aspects of p ro so d y , or the principles that
govern the writing of poetry, such as rhyme, meter, rhythm, and so forth.
Note how the poet manipulates metrical devices, grammatical construc
tions, tonal patterns, and syntactic patterns of words, phrases, clauses, or
sentences. Determine how these various patterns interrelate with each
other and with all elements discussed in steps 1 to 3.
Step 5 Consider such elements as tone, theme, point of view, and any other ele
mentdialogue, foreshadowing, narration, parody, setting, and so forth
that directly relate to the text's dramatic situation.
Step 6 Look for interrelationships of all elements stated in steps 1-5, noting
where tensions, ambiguities, or paradoxes arise.
Step 7 After carefully examining all of the above, state the poem 's chief, overar
ching tension, and explain how the poem achieves its dominant effect by
resolving this tension.
Because all p o e m s a re unio.iP m

tension is also unique. By usjnV process of uncovering a poem's chief
Criticism, New Critics believe t h a f r e J prescribed m ethod ology of New
p re ta tio n s o f a te x t w ith in fo r m a tio n ^ b e a b l e t o l u s t if y th e ir inter'
y in g e a e s th e tic p ro c e s s th a t a l l o w f , f a n e d f r m t b e t e x t a lo n e w h ile en-
D o em ,CC+r ,n ^ t 0 SUcb N e w C r it ic a l n 6 0 1 t 0 a r b c u la t e t h e t e x t 's m ean in g.
S nnrU? re b y S cru d n i 2 ingÎts l PetlnC1,P ,e S ' 3 d critic e x a m in e s a
meaning by reconcnt ^ ^ t r a t i n g h o w T l T * 8' r tin 8 OUt and sh ^

bad critics irn iK g tbese tensions into tbe P oem supports its overall
as historical u St? wbo insist on imnoQ- 3 Unifled w hole. By implication,
These critics hi] ,.8raphical information ^ mainly extrinsic evidence, such
frequently than not the^ , ^ *he text i t s e l f disCOVer its nieani,lg;
f a work of art: iron ^ S fad to discuss 1Clts. lts ow n meaning. More
their analysis decl i y' paradx, and amhi r examine the definitive aspects
Asserting that i r. t<Xt can have nu . ?e SUcb unskilled critics b elief

Critic s believe tin tVi P<Mm (,r Work of T > ,e Meanings
1 Xt u,l,rnM y has one b ? wntoIg ical statu s, the
1nc only one correct interpret^011
and that the poem itself provides all the necessary information for revealing
its meaning. By scrutinizing the text and giving it a close reading, and by
providing readers with a set of norms that will assist them in discovering the
correct interpretation of the text, New Criticism provides a teachable, workable
framework for literary analysis.
Q U EST IO N S F O R A N A L Y S IS
To apply the assu m p tion s and m eth od ology of N ew C riticism , read carefu lly
Nathaniel H aw th o rn e's short story "Y oung G ood m an B ro w n " (located at the
back of this text). A fter reading the story, answ er each of the follow ing qu es
tions as they relate to H aw th o rn e's tale. W hen you have com p leted you r an
sw ers, b e p rep ared to d iscu ss y o u r fin d in g s or w h at the N ew C ritics call
your in terp retation of this sh ort story.
If the text has a title, what is the relationship of the title to the rest of the poem?
Before answering this question, New Critical theory and practice assume that
the critic has read the text several times.
What words, if any, need to be defined?
What words and their etymological roots need to be scrutinized?
What relationships or patterns do you see among any words in the text?
What words in the text possess various connotative meanings? Do these various
shades of meaning help establish relationships or patterns in the text?
What allusions, if any, are in the text? Trace these allusions to their appropriate
sources and explore how the origins of the allusions help elucidate meaning in
this particular text.
What symbols, images, and figures of speech are used? What is the relationship
between any symbol and/or image? Between an image and another image?
Between a figure of speech and an image? A symbol?
What elements of prosody can you note and discuss? Look for rhyme, meter, and
stanza patterns.
What is the tone of the work?
From what point of view is the content of the text being told?
What tensions, ambiguities, or paradoxes arise within the text?
What do you believe the chief paradox or irony is in the text?
How do all the elements of the text support and develop the text's chief paradox?
c r it iq u e s a n d r e s p o n s e s
W ith th e emergence o f N e w C r i t i c i s m i n t h e l lM ( ) s c a m e t h e b i r t h a n d g r o w t h
f l i t e r a t u r e d e p a r t m e n t s in c o l l e g e s a n d u n i v e r s i t i e s a c r o s s A m e r i c a . Its
M eth o d o lo g ical a n d s o m e w h a t scien tific a p p ro a ch to lit e r a t u r e g a in e d
enormous support as monies for academic research expanded and as arm .a

forces personnel returned to America from the battlefields of Europe afte
World War 11. As the influence of English literature expanded, there aroseâ
practical need for a consistent and a convenient form of literary criticism
Brooks and Warren's text Understanding Poetry: An Anthology for College
Students (1938) provided such consistency. College professors could now
focus upon a single text (particularly poetry but also any text written in any
genre) that could be easily studied and analyzed by following the prescribed
"form ula" as developed by the New Critics. No longer did students have to
know the sociohistorical background of any given text because now the text
itself was the object of examination.
Such a formulaic approach to literary analysis, which excludes most exter
nal evidence from its analytic methodology, readily opens itself to criticism.
Some critics assert that different perspectives for understanding a text's mean
ing do indeed exist and can help broaden what constitutes literature.
Examining authors' lives, for example, can illuminate their works. Psychology,
sociology, and history, claim many critics, do impact both individual writers
and their works, helping to fill a vacuum created by examining only the text.
Without such analyses, argue many critics, we will miss out on many relevant
and important meanings and purposes of texts. By dismissing such external-
text analyses, the New Critics may indeed be contradicting their own claims
that the meaning of a text is context-bound. For example, a work's sociohistori
cal context, assert New Criticism's challengers, is indeed part of its context and,
therefore, its meaning. Other critics argue that the methodology espoused by
New Criticism is elitist. To arrive at the so-called "correct" interpretation of a
text, a reader much first learn the vocabulary and the correct procedures for
such analysis. Do the feelings or ideas of an actual reader who has not mastered
New Criticism's theory really matter? Can such feelings or beliefs lead to a
valid interpretation of a text? Need the interpretation of a text always be so ob
jective as claim the New Critics? Must all "good" texts possess organic unity?
And can New Criticism's search for a text's organic unity blind the critic to im
portant elements of a text that do not contribute to such unity? Albeit New
Criticism's insistence on the objective nature of literary interpretation, individ
ual readers who may or may not be trained in New Critical methodology wiU
most certainly find a variety of ways to make meaning of a particular text.
Despite these and other criticisms, the influence of New Criticism on
twentieth- and twenty-first-century literary analyses remains. All schools o
criticism, for example, espouse a close reading of a text. And New Criticism s
terminology and its understanding of a literary work of art have influenced'"
either directly or indirectlyall modern schools of literary criticism.
W h a t o t h e r a d v a n t a g e s o r d i s a d v a n t a g e s d o y o u s e e i n u s i n g the p r u I '
p i e s o f N e w Critic ism to c r i t i q u e a lit e r a r y w o r k ? i
S e e R e a d i n g s o n L ite r a r y C r i t i c i s m at th e b a c k o f th e te x t fo r a p '^
e s s a y o n N e w C r i t i c i s m , " T h e F o r m a l i s t C r i t i c s , " a u t h o r e d b y o n e o f N*
C r itic is m 's le a d in g sch o lars C leanth b ro ok s.
Reader-oriented Criticism
The house o f fiction has in short not one window, but a milliona number of pos
sible windows not to be reckoned, rather; every one of which has been pierced, or is
still pierceable, in its vast front, by the need of the individual vision and by the
pressure of the individual will.
Henry James, Preface to the New York edition of Portrait of a Lady
IN TR O D U C TIO N
magine, for a moment, that you and three of your closest friends are once
I again eight years old. All of you have been invited to a birthday party at
another friend's house three blocks away. For four weeks you have been
eagerly anticipating the big event. Unlike you and your three friends, the
birthday party celebrant is the child of millionaires and lives in a mansion
containing thirty-four rooms and has let it be known that the party would be
the biggest and best you have ever attended. Not surprisingly, rumors that
the celebration would include a circus with clowns and animals dressed in
human clothes and accompanied by a host of costumed people and the full
trappings of a Barnum and Bailey production have been circulating among
the four of you for weeks. But today is Saturday, the day of the big event.
Meeting at your house at 9:30 a.m., you and your friends excitedly
walk the three blocks to the birthday house. Upon arrival, you see that the
front door is com pletely covered with red aluminum foil with no door
knob visible. Even the doorbell is shielded from view by the bright foil
covering. Quickly one of your friends dashes to the back of the house,
hoping to gain access through the back door. With head hung low, this
friend returns in about a minute with the news that the back door is also
covered with red foil.
Being the nearest to the front window to the right of the door, you peek
into the house and what a sight you see! On the tile near the fireplace
sleeps a lion. To the left of the lion is a cage containing a leopard licking a
block of ice. And directly below the window is the longest snake you have
65
Chapter 4 Reader-oriented Criticism
. friends to come and see the animals, but tK

ever seen. You scream for you view into the house. To your righ, N
too, have each discovered th w ,edge and is peering through a D' e
of your friends is standing o h den is clearly visible, but no on
hole window. Through thts n o signs of any pa
thereno decorations, no mo Bu( another friend has found a u
gloomy and most certamly house,s front door. Climbing up the ladder
der and placed it to the le window and sees at least fifte! '
this friend gazes into t e th donkey while they are drinkin
laughing children, playing Pm -the tad , t h ^ . ^ chjps ^
purple punch and ea mg h vjew into the party house: runnine
the fourth child has discovered ano het c - ^ ^ ^ mg
taTnof ts wrapped^ funny-looking paper, some with big bows, ,her
"T h e door being barredâTl four children have discovered a way to see
into the same house, each of the openings being of a d ifferent size and shape,
with each opening providing a different view. Where one chdd is longing to
pet the lion, the leopard, and the snake, another is saddened by the apparent
emptiness of the house. Another, however, is eager to gain entrance and join
the many children eating and playing, and the last friend is joyous at the
sight of the mountain of presents. The same house but different \iews. The
same house but different reactions to each view into its contents.
According to Henry James (1843-1916), this house represents a literary
texta story, a novel, a poem, or an essaywith each window being an in
dividual reader's distinct view into or impression of that literary work. Like
the four children peering into the house's windows and seeing different
views, readers will read the same text but "see" unique scenes, coming away
from the text with various impressions and interpretations. Each will most
certainly be reading the same text, but all will gain entrance into the mean
ing of that text through different apertures and come away with a variety of
differing and sometimes contradictory interpretations.
Now imagine that you and other members of your college-level, intro
ductory literature class have been asked to read N athaniel Hawthorne s
short story Young Goodman Brown" (1835), part of which reads as follows:
And there they stood, the only pair, as it seemed, who were yet hesitating on
the ror^n-fTT 6 ^ thlS dark world' A basin was hollowed, naturally, in
lur; dphSht? or was it blood? or,
pare to lav the mark nf k d th ShaPe of Evd dip his hand, and pre
takers of the mystery of sin m!T UP n foreheads' that theY might be Par'
deed and thought, than thev r re.ônscious of the secret guilt of others, both in
look at his pale wife and Faith^f, nWbe tEeir own. The husband cast one
glance show them to each oth 3 ^ bat polluted wretches would the next
what they saw! er' S U Bering alike at what they disclosed an
Chapter 4 Reader-oriented Criticism 67
"Faith! Faith! cried the husband. "Look up to Heaven, and resist the
Wicked One!"
Whether Faith obeyed, he knew not. Hardly had he spoken, when he found
himself amid calm night and solitude, listening to a roar of the wind, which
died heavily away through the forest. He staggered against the rock and felt it
chill and damp, while a hanging twig, that had been all on fire, besprinkled his
cheek with the coldest dew.
The next morning, young goodman Brown came slowly into the street of
Salem village, staring around him like a bewildered man. The good old minis
ter was taking a walk along the graveyard, to get an appetite for breakfast and
meditate his sermon, and bestowed a blessing, as he passed, on goodman
Brown. He shrank from the venerable saint, as if to avoid an anathema. Old
deacon Gookin was at domestic worship, and the holy words of his prayer
were heard through the open window. "What God doth the wizard pray to?"
quoth goodman Brown. Goody Close, that excellent old Christian, stood in the
early sunshine, at her own lattice, catechising a little girl, who had brought her
a pint of morning's milk. Goodman Brown snatched away the child, as from
the grasp of the fiend himself. Turning the corner by the meeting-house, he
spied the head of Faith, with the pink ribbons, gazing anxiously forth, and
bursting into such joy at sight of him, that she skipt along the street, and almost
kissed her husband before the whole village. But, goodman Brown looked
sternly and sadly into her face, and passed on without a greeting.
Had goodman Brown fallen asleep in the forest, and only dreamed a wild
dream of a witch-meeting?
Be it so, if you will. But, alas! it was a dream of evil omen for young good-
man Brown.
Several class members are now voicing their interpretations of this con
cluding portion of Hawthorne's story. Student A declares that Goodman
Brown's struggle is obvious; Brown finds himself engrossed in the age-old ten
sion of appearance versus reality, a theme that has permeated Western litera
ture for centuries. It is ambiguity, maintains Student A, that unites the short
story and shows how every character and every event contribute to the text's
organic unity. For example, in commanding his wife to "Look up to Heaven,
and resist the Wicked One," Brown attests both to the struggle between and
the reality of good and evil. When, however, Brown finds himself "amid calm
night and solitude," he convinces himself that his wife and, in fact, all mem
bers of his Salem village did not resist the Wicked One. For Brown, main
tains Student A, all except himself are hypocrites, and all except himself have
been baptized into evil. And yet his personal revelation concerning the pres
ence and the mystery of evil in the lives of others seemingly affects only him
and no other Salem villager, neither any member of the clergy nor even
Brown's wife. Perhaps, says the narrator, Brown merely fell asleep in the forest
and the events he experienced are simply a dream. All elements of the story,
declares Student A, point to and demonstrate Hawthorne's use of ambiguity
as the key to unlocking the meaning of this tale.
valid criticisms of Hawthorne's text, J ey haV(f ov rl k(ed1 cha"ge that
takes place in Goodman Brown himself. After the events of that fateful night
in the forest-cither real or im agined-no longer do we see a Goodman
Brown who trusts in the goodness of humanity. We now have a character
whose entire lifehis thoughts and actionsis one of despair, a life that sees
no good in anyone. Everyone in the Salem village, Brown believes, is living a
lie because all are hypocrites. And for the rest of his life he remains a solemn
person who casts suspicious and supposedly knowing glances at his peers
and his wife, all of whom, he believes, have pledged their allegiance to
evil. And thus Brown's "dying hour was gloom," just like his life after the
forest scene.
With a quiver in her voice, Student D remarks that Goodman Brown re
minds her of her friend Rita. Whenever Rita's husband meets her in public
at the mall, grocery store, or McDonald'she gives her a quick stare then
looks the other way. Even when they are at home together, he prefers to sit in
his study watching a movie on his computer than sitting with her and their
two children in the family room watching one of the children's favorite
movies. Like Faith Brown, says Student D, Rita has no idea what she has
done to distance herself from her husband. Nightly she cries herself to sleep,
wishing her husband would hold her. In "Young Goodman Brown," asserts
Student D, Hawthorne has successfully captured the predicament of some
twenty-first-century wives, women whose lives are filled with despair and
they know not why.
Each of these four students sees something slightly different in
aww fmm m0;r ....... jcîving different impressions, and coming

central theme. Using the tenets of New Criticism, Student A posits the organic
unity of the text. For this student, learning and applying literary terminology
and searching for the correct interpretation are of utmost importance.
Unlike Student A, who applies a given set of criteria to the text in an at
tempt to discover its meaning, Students B, C, and D become participants in
the interpretive process, actively bringing their own experiences to bear
upon the text s meaning. Student B's interpretation, for example, highlights
the theoretical difference between a text's meaning (the author's intentions)
and its significance or relevance to present-day readers. Student C's ap
proach begins filling in the gaps in the text, hypothesizing how Goodman
Brown will act toward his peers and family based on his either real or imag
ined experience in the forest. Whether Student C is correct or not about
Brown's actions throughout the rest of his life remains an open question.
Student D's theoretical framework objectifies the text and its meaning based
on the reader's personal experiences with prejudice.
Although Students B, C, and D differ in their various approaches, none
views the text as an objective entity that contains its own meaning (as does
Student A). For these readers, the text does not and cannot interpret itself. To
determine a text's meaning, these students believe they must become active
readers and participants in the interpretive process. The various theoretical
assumptions and methodologies they used to discover the text's meaning
exemplify reader-response criticism, now frequently referred to as reader-
oriented criticism.
H IST O R IC A L D E V E L O P M E N T
Although reader-oriented criticism rose to prominence in the United States

in the early 1970s and still influences much contemporary criticism, its his
torical roots can be traced to the 1920s and 1930s. But such precise dating is
artificial because readers have obviously been responding to what they have
read and experienced since the dawn of literature itself. Even the classical
writers Plato and Aristotle were aware of and concerned about the reader's
(or viewer's) reactions. Plato, for example, asserts that watching a play could
so inflame the passions of the audience that the attendees would forget that
they were rational beings and allow passion, not reason, to rule their actions.
Similarly in the Poetics, Aristotle voices concern about the effects a play will
have on the audience's emotions. Will it arouse the spectators' pity or fear?
Will these emotions purge the viewer? Will they cleanse a spectator of all
emotions by the play's end? Like Plato's and Aristotle's audience-centered
concerns, such interest in audience response to the artistic creation dominates
much present-day literary criticism. Critics who emphasize such audience
^sponse frequently involve themselves in rhetorical criticism, focusing on
70 Chapter 4 Reader-oriented C r.ttcism
the strategies, devices, and techniques a u th o rs u se to e licit a particular reac-
ti0nUnidne Z ^ a b0oth0 P la to 's and A r is to tle 's c o n c e r n s a b o u t audience

response as well as the concern of m an y c n t.c s w h o fo llo w m them p a th s -
is the assumption that the audience o r the read er is p a ssiv e . A s it watching a
play or reading a book were a sp ectator sp o rt, re a d e rs sit p a s s u ely, absorbing
the contents of the artistic creation and allow ing it to d o m in a te their thoughts
and actions. From this point of view, the read er b rin g s little to the plav or text,
with the text providing all that is needed to arriv e at a v alid interpretation.
From Plato's time until the b egin n in g o f th e r o m a n tic m ovem ent in
British literature in the earlv 1800s, such a p assiv e v ie w o f the reader domi
nated literary criticism. Although m anv critics reco g n iz e d th at a text did in
deed have an effect on its readers, criticism con cern ed itself prim arily with the
text. With the advent of British ro m a n ticism , e m p h a s is sh ifted from the
text to the author. The author now becam e the gen iu s w h o co u ld assimilate
truths that were unacknowledged or unseen by the g e n eral populace. And
as the nineteenth century progressed, concern for the a u th o r continued, with
literary criticism stressing the im p ortan ce of the a u th o r 's life, times, and
social context as chief aids in textual analysis
By the beginning of the twentieth century, em p h asis in textual analysis
m d n n rti.v in ii m in i th tin. ascen dan ce of Nuvv C riticism s theory
.hat could be - o n o m o u s - a n objective entity
believed, the text would reveal Us r Studied thorou gh ly, the N ew Critics
historical or social context m in >^ m eaning- E xtrin sic factors, such as
pretation was the actual text the SOIJ evvha t, but the key to a text's inter-
bal icon, the text itself, declared th^N ^ ! n h a n d. N o w considered a ver'
discover its meaning. We need o n ^ Critics, co n tain s w h at is needed to
correct techniques to unlock its m l the tech cal vocab u lary and the
Declaring a text an autotelic artifT w-
an autonomous object that can be an , ^ 3 teXt exists in ow n right as
edge the effects a text could h a v e ? y2ed)' the N ew C ritics did acknowl'
erary work, they decreed, t a not H ' " * * * * Studying^ the e je c ts of a lit'
a ; r Ss-ve ,d? Phtr SiS- * :^ * c s tu d y l^ tS e lf . * *
.oPbtt w C e n "; T id not bring person r e f ,he text aSain ^ <
en8ased ln textual an aly st exPeriences or private emotion5
I- A. Richards
In the midst of New r
analysis that would lastr; tlCiSm's rise to h A
re td t; A- Rich d s <T S rp^re lhan hhrnm i n a n c e in the field of t e * ^ 1
reading process itself. u , T E1'ot being ne o f its w o C
nl,ke "'nny of h " ther>- became interested in%
Form alist friends w ho d i s a v o ^
C hapter 4 Reader-oriented Criticism 71
any significant relationship between a reader's personal feelings and a text's

interpretation, Richards set about to investigate such a relationship. Using a
decidedly reader-oriented approach to textual analysis, Richards distributed
to his classes at Cambridge University copies of short poems of widely di
verse aesthetic and literary value, without citing their authors and titles but
with various editorial changes that updated spelling and pronunciation. He
then asked his students to record their free responses to and evaluations of
each of these texts. W hat surprised Richards was the wide variety of seem
ingly incompatible and contradictory responses.
After collecting and analyzing these responses, Richards published his
findings, along with his own interpretations of the exam ined texts, in
Principles o f Literary Criticism (1924). Underiving Richards's text is his as
sumption that science, not poetry or any other literarv genre, leads to truth
that is, science's view of the world is the correct one. Poems, on the other
hand, can produce only "pseudo-statem ents" about the nature of reality. But
such pseudo-statements, declares Richards, are essential to the overall psy
chological health of each individual. In fact, according to Richards, hum an
beings are basically bundles of desires called ap p eten cies. In order to
achieve psychic health, one must balance these desires by creating a person
ally acceptable vision of the world. Richards observes that religion was once
able to provide this vision, but has now lost its effectiveness to do so.
Borrowing from the thoughts of the nineteenth-century poet M atthew
Arnold, Richards decrees that poetry, above all other art forms, can best har
monize and satisfy hum ankind's appetencies and help create a fulfilling and
intellectually acceptable worldview.
After creating this substantially affective system of analysis, which gives
credence to a reader's emotional response to a text, Richards then abandons
this same reader-oriented approach in his own analysis of his students' re
sponses. Like the New Critics who were to follow him in the next several
decades, he asserts that "the poem itself" contains all the necessary inform a
tion to arrive at the "righ t" or "m ore adequate" interpretation. Through tex
tual analysis that is, by closely examining the poem 's diction, imagery, and
overall unity Richards believes a reader can arrive at a better or m ore
nearly correct interpretation of a poem than one derived from personal re
sponses to a text.
Despite this seemingly complete departure from his initial reader-oriented
methodology, Richards recognizes the contextual nature of the reading process.
In his text Practical Criticism: A Study o f Literary Judgment (1929), Richards ac
knowledges that a reader brings to the text a vast array of ideas am assed
through life's experiences, including previous literary experiences, and applies
SUch information to the text to develop an interpretation. These life experiences
Provide a kind of reality check for the reader, either validating or negating the
Authenticity of the experiences as represented in the text. In so doing, the reader
ecmes an active participant in the creation of a text's meaning.
72 Chapter 4 Reader-oriented Criticism
Louise M . R osenblatt
In the 1930s, Louise M. Rosenblatt, literary theorist, author, scholar, and

renowned professor of literacy, further develops Richards's earlier assump
tions concerning the contextual nature of the reading process. In her text
Literature as Exploration (1938), Rosenblatt asserts that both the reader and
the text must work together to create meaning. Unlike the New Critics, she
shifts the emphasis of textual analysis away from the text alone and views
the reader and the text as partners in the interpretative process. For
Rosenblatt, a text is not an autotelic artifact, and there aie no generic literary
works or generic readers who must master the Formalists methodology with
its accompanying complex and often dense terminology to gain the so-called
correct interpretation of a text. Instead, Rosenblatt declares, there are mil
lions of potential individual readers of the potential millions of individual
texts. Readers bring their individual personalities, their memories of past
events, their present concerns, their particular physical conditions, and all of
their personhood to the reading of a text. Disavowing New Criticism s affec
tive fallacy and other such beliefs, Rosenblatt asserts the validity of multiple
interpretations of a text shaped not only by the text but also by the reader.
In the late 1930s, Rosenblatt's ideas seemed revolutionary, too abstract,
and simply off the beaten, acceptable critical path. Although New Criticism
dominated literary practice for the next thirty years or so, Rosenblatt contin
ued to develop her ideas, publishing in 1978 The Reader, the Text, the Poem
The Transactional Theory of the Literary Work. This work became a pivotal force
in helping to cause a paradigm shift in the teaching of literature. As articu
lated by Rosenblatt, the key element in the interpretive process now change
from focusing almost exclusively on the text alone to a reader's individ^
response to a text. In this work, Rosenblatt clarifies her earlier ideas and pr^
sents what has become one of the main critical positions held by many me
rists and practical critics today.
According to Rosenblatt, the reading process involves both a reader an^
text. The reader and the text participate in or share a transactional e x p ^ " '
The text acts as a stimulus for eliciting various past experiences, thouffV
and ideas from the reader, those found in both the reader's everyday e
tence and in his or her reading experiences. Simultaneously, the text M 4
the reader s e x p e n s e s by functioning as a blueprint that selects,
orders those uleas that best conform to the text Through this
expenence, the reader and the text produce a new creation, what R < * ^ a
calls the poem. For Rosenblatt- 4 , . *
. I 1 , UU)imt and manv other reader-oriented ,,4jf$
^ or what It " * , T " *< * s P ace during ,l f
i t "K N i>
1 - rereadings Z s i i n CUon " d " '8 ^
C hapter 4 Reader-oriented Criticism 73
For Rosenblatt, readers can and do read in one of two ways: efferentlu or
aesthetically. W hen we read for information for example, when we read the
directions for heating a can of soup we are engaging in efferent reading
(from the Latin effere "to carry aw ay"). During this process, we are interested
only in newly gained inform ation that we can "carry aw ay" from the text,
not in the actual w ords as words themselves. When we read efferently, we
are motivated by a specific need to acquire information. When we engage in
aesthetic reading, we experience the text. We note its every word, its sounds,
its patterns, and so on. In essence, we live through the transactional experi
ence of creating the poem. O f primary importance is our engagement or our
unique "lived-through" experience with the text. Rosenblatt adds that at any
given m om ent in the reading process a reader may shift back and forth along
a continuum betw een an efferent and an aesthetic mode of reading.
When reading aesthetically, Rosenblatt maintains that we involve our
selves in an elaborate give-and-take encounter with the text. Though the text
may allow for m any interpretations by eliciting and highlighting different
experiences of the reader, it sim ultaneously limits the valid meanings the
poem can acquire. For Rosenblatt, a poem's meaning is not a smorgasbord of
infinite interpretations; rather, it is a transactional experience in which sev
eral different yet probable m eanings emerge in a particular social context
and thereby create a variety of "poem s."
What differentiates Rosenblatt's and other reader-oriented critics' con
cerns from oth er critical approaches (especially New Criticism ) is their
purposive shift in em phasis away from the text, as the sole determiner of
meaning and toward the significance of the reader as an essential participant
in the reading process and the creation of meaning. Such a shift negates the
Formalists' assum ption that the text is autonomous and can be scientifically
analyzed to discover its meaning. No longer is the reader passive, merely ap-
plying a laundry list of learned, poetic devices to a text in the hope of dis
covering its intricate patterns of paradox and irony, which, in turn, will lead,
supposedly, to the one correct interpretation. For reader-oriented critics, the
reader is an active participant along with the text in creating meaning. It is
from the literacy experience (an event that occurs when a reader and print
transact), they believe, that meaning evolves.
A S S U M P T IO N S
Similar to most approach.-* to literary analysis, reader-oriented cri.totsm does

provide us with a unified body of theory or a sm,;le n.ethodoloK>ca! ap
proach for textual analysis. What those who call themselves reader-response
Crhcs, reader-oriented critics, reader cr,tics, or audience-oriented cnt.es
**M* is a concern for the reader. Ilelievin,; that a literary work s interpretation
74
pxt interact and/or transact, these critics as-
is created when a reader and a te x t------
er study of textual analysis must consider both the reader
so rt that the proper
and the text, not simply a text in isolation. For these critics,
Reader + Text = Meaning (Poem)
O n ly in c o n te x t, w ith a re a d e r a c tiv e ly in v o lv e d in th e r e a d in g p ro c e s s with

th e tex t, d o e s m e a n in g em erg e .
M e a n in g , d e c la re re a d e r-o rie n te d c r itic s , is c o n t e x t - d e p e n d e n t an d intri
c a te ly a s s o c ia te d w ith th e re a d in g p r o c e s s . L ik e li t e r a r y t h e o r y a s a whole
s e v e ra l th e o re tic a l m o d e ls a n d th e ir p r a c tic a l a p p l i c a t i o n s e x is t to explain
m P ro cess o r h o w w e m a k e s e n s e o f p r in t e d m a t e r ia l. U s in g these
into threrbroad ^ ^ rlurr|erous aPProaches to t h e literacy experience

philosophy a hoH ' A ' E a ch c a te o ry emphasizes a somewhat different
L s e v a r i e s rrm X u aSSUm P tio ns- a " d a m e t h o d o l o g y t o explain what
X r ^ e d m a JS , eV e h a P P e " S W h e" 3 r e a d e r - t r a c t s o r transacts
a ll h o ld to s o m e t f X t a m e PpreseS 3 d ' ffe r e n t a P P r<)ad l to t e x tu a l analysis,

q u estio n s. A ll fo r e x a m n l o c ^ o p p o s itio n s a n d c o n c e r n s a n d a s k similar
p e n s, th ey ask , w h en a p e r s o n 'p ^ c k s ^ ^ ^ ^ r e a d in P rocess- W h a t haP
o th e r w ay, th eir ch ief in terest i u P n n te d m a t e r ia l a n d r e a d s it? Put an-
o r tran sact. D u rin g th is ex ch an ^ ^ CCUrs w ^ e n a te x t a n d a r e a d e r interact
o riz e w h eth er th e reader, th e te x t' re a d e r' o r ie n te d c r itic s in v e s tig a te and the-
te x t s in te rp re ta tio n . Is it th e re ^ f 0 6 corr> b in atio n f in a lly d e te rm in e s the
d e r, o r d o e s th e te x t m a n i n u l a L W h m aniP ulates t h e t e x t , th e y pon-
s o m e w o rd , p h ra se , o r im a g e tn V a 6 r.e a d e r t o p r o d u c e m e a n in g ? Does
ta h o n , or d o e s th e read er a p p ro a ch ^ r e a d e r ' s m in d a s p e c ific interpre-
collection o f learned reading sh atep i w i ,h a c o n s c io u s o r unconscious
hon on the text? Is the re a d fn t pX h a t ^ m a t o l l y im p o s e a n i n t e r p ^ ;
w ed ctah, beratey "V *> misdeadTh ^ r l i n e a r , an d is it p r e d i c t
predictable mistakes? And are ready th er* y causing readers to make
"farces: Ana are reader's responses always predictable?
Such questions then lead reader-oriented critics to a further narto u
anu developing of terminology. They ask, for exam ple, w hat is a tex ; >
simply
* the words or symbols on a i - - rLl *
between what is V c tJa liy X h T f ? ge? How' " 'e y ask, can we differe'"-
And wh" - read,irya " ,w ! .'f and wl' at is in the mind of the1 - 1- ,
it y? Although
dthough reade
readers restxVn '' ,l,UU r s' or an* all responses of c<lU*uy is*1,
they
ask, that oftentinu-s iivmw U, saniw u*t in a variety of wayS/ * coV
clusK
mis or interpretations 1 ri?,u,l?rs individually arrive at the sa
1 u u * s a m e text?
Reader-oriented critics also ask questions about another person: the au

thor. What part, if any, does the author play in a work's interpretation? Can
the author s attitudes toward the reader, they wonder, actually influence a
work's meaning? And if a reader knows the author's clearly stated inten
tions for a text, does this information play any part in creating the text's
meaning, or should an author's intentions for a work simply be ignored?
The concerns, then, of reader-oriented critics can best be summarized in
one question: What is the reading process that is, how does the reader con
struct meaning or make sense of a text? The answer to this question is per
plexing because it involves investigating such factors as these:
The readerincluding his or her view of the world, background, purpose for
reading, knowledge of the world, knowledge of words, and other such factors
The text, with all its various linguistic elements
Meaning, or how the text and the reader interact or transact so the reader can
make sense of the printed material.
How reader-oriented critics define and explain each of these elements will,
in fact, determine their approach to textual analysis. Furthermore, their
definitions and explications also help determine what constitutes a valid
interpretation of a text for each critic.
Although many reader-oriented critics allow for a wide range of legiti
mate responses to a text, most agree that reader-oriented criticism does not
mean that any and all interpretations are valid or of equal importance. The
boundaries and restrictions placed on possible interpretations of a text will
vary, depending on how the critic defines the multiple elements of the read
ing process. It is these definitions and assumptions that allow us to group
reader-oriented critics into several broad subgroups.
methodology
Although reader-oriented critics employ a wide variety of critical approaches

from those espousing their own particular and modified form of New
Criticism to postmodern practitioners such as deconstructionists most ad
herents of reader-oriented theory and practice fall into three distinct
groups. While members within each group may differ slightly, each group
spouses its own distinct theoretical and methodological concerns. Student
B's interpretation at the beginning of this chapter represents the focus of the
first group.
Similar to all reader-oriented critics, this group believes that the reader
mu*t be an active participant in the creation of meaning. For these critics,
however, the text has more control over the interpretative process than does
he reader. A few of these critics lean toward New Critical theory, asserting
\
76 Chapter4 - Rder-orien.edCriticism
a> more valid than others, while others d i f f e r

that some and its significance. For them, the text's me
ate between a text m 8 author.s intenhon, while its significance cai,
ing can be synon^ , or historical period to another. Notwithstanding
CS r " t h e majority of critics in this firs, group belong to a school 8f
criticism known as structuralism.
Structuralism
Basing their ideas on the writings of Ferdinand de Saussure, the founder of

modem linguistics, structuralists often approach textual analysis as if it wer
a science. The proponents of structuralismRoland Barthes Gerard
Genette, Roman Jakobson, Claude Levi-Strauss, Gerald Prince, and lonathan
Culler in his early workslook for specific codes within a text that allow
meaning to occur. These codes or signs embedded in the text are part of a
literal ^ T M a ws meanin8 occur in all facets of society including
r - - r
sirens are signs or codes in our sodetv thaT ^' BH*h ligh' a" d
preting and ordering our world ^ th3t provide us Wlth ways of inter-
mined system for ascertaining m^CS/3 reader brings to the text a predeter-
like the sirens and the red liehn ear^lng (a complex system of signs or codes
text. The text becomes important appês his sign system directly to the
rea er that have preestablished a n d ** contains signs or signals to the
a efv! therefore' more c o n c e r n ^ T interPretations. Many struc-
analvskû^ âs deve^ped (called l 3 Ut overall system of meaning
about inte^ ^ concentrate their ffanûe ^ linguists) than with textual
acceptabler^ tm8 3ny siSn (such as a ^ n What a reader needs t0
to push bothd!etal Standards. Because^*d sign or a word) in the context o
attention on a l w * ^ the **d er to t h l structuralists see*
structuralism haîk St*C^ eory of com ackground and concentrate the
^ ^ rs lT e n tu ume a a" d interpretation. SWJ
theory and practical the ries oH iterarv^ many other twentieth-
eanwhile, the idea^'f* ^ Wil1 be exn ^ 10801' itS significance t0
trate he method^ 8 f, 0ne leading * P 0red at length in the next chaps
Ceia,dP. ^ Struurafifm S,rUCtura^t, Gerald Prince, will
sructuraIi'nC* he I97()c n
a" ,he devel p a pd* ^

on.il pronouns, audience, and so forth. Prince noted that critics

^Questions about the story s point of view omniscient, limited,
ofh'n >n and so onbut rarely do they ask about the person to whom the
first lH'r_ spe<aking, the n a r r a t e e . Usually, the narratee is not the actual per-
^ o d in g * e text, for Prince argues that the narrative itselfthat is, the
500 produces the narratee. By first observing then analyzing various
Stry^ the text, such as pronoun reference; direct address ("Dear reader");
?*Mder, ra ce , an<^ so c^ c ass references; and writing style, Prince believes it
^possible not only to identify the narratee but also to classify stories based
^ the different kinds of narratees created by the texts themselves. Such nar-
ratees may include the r e a l r e a d e r (the person actually reading the book), the
virtual reader (the reader to whom the author believes he or she is writing),
and the i d e a l r e a d e r (the one who explicitly and implicitly understands all
the nuances, terminology, and structure of a text).
A lthough such an approach relies heavily on textual analysis, Prince's
concerns about the reader place him in the reader-oriented school of criti
cism. Other structuralists such as Jonathan Culler who distance themselves
from Prince and this kind of close reliance on the text to generate meaning
will be discussed in Chapter 5.
Phenomenology
Student C represents the second major group of reader-oriented critics. For

the most part, these theorists follow Rosenblatt's assumption that the reader
is involved in a transactional experience when interpreting a text. Both the
text and the reader, they declare, play somewhat equal parts in the interpre
tative process. For them, reading is an event that culminates in the creation
of the poem.
Many adherents in this groupGeorge Poulet, Wolfgang Iser, Hans
Robert Jauss, Roman Ingarden, and Gaston Bachelardare often associated
with phenomenology. P h e n o m e n o l o g y is a modern philosophical tendency
that emphasizes the perceiver. Objects can have meaning, phenomenologists
maintain, only if an active consciousness (a perceiver) absorbs or notes their
existence. In other words, objects exist if, and only if, we register them in our
consciousness. Rosenblatt's definition of a poem directly applies this theory
to literary study. The true poem can exist only in the reader s consciousness,
not on the printed page. When reader and text transact, the poem and, there-
fore, meaning are created; they exist only in the consciousness of the reader.
Reading and textual analysis now become an aesthetic experience wherein
both the reader and the text combine in the consciousness of the reader to
ust work, filling in the gaps in the text <

act>ons, personality traits, and motives
reader-response critics, Hans Robert Jauss and Wolfgang Iser, will serve to il
lustrate phenomenology's methodology.
Hans Robert Jauss Writing toward the end of the 1960s, the German critic
Hans Robert Jauss emphasizes that a text's social history must be considered
when interpreting a text. Unlike New Critical scholars, Jauss declares that
critics must examine how any given text was accepted or received by its con
temporary readers. Espousing a particular kind of reader-oriented criticism
known as reception theory, Jauss asserts that readers from any given histor
ical period devise for themselves the criteria whereby they will judge a text.
Using the term horizon of expectations to include all of a historical period s
critical vocabulary and assessment of a text, Jauss points out that how any
text is evaluated from one historical period to another (from the eighteenth-
century Age of Enlightenment to the nineteenth-century Romantic period,
for example) necessarily changes. For example, Alexander Pope's poetry
was heralded as the most nearly perfect poetry of its day, for heroic couplets
and poetry that followed prescribed forms were judged superior. During the
Romantic period, however, with its emphasis on content, not form, the criti
cal acclaim and reception of Pope's poetry was not as great.
Accordingly, Jauss argues that since each historical period establishes its
own horizon of expectations, the overall value and meaning of any text can
never become fixed or universal. Readers from any given historical period
establish for themselves, Jauss maintains, what they value in a text. A text,
then, does not have one and only one correct interpretation because its sup-
posed meaning changes from one historical period to another. A final assess
ment about any literary work thus becomes impossible.
For Jauss, the reader's reception or understanding and evaluation of a
text matters greatly. Although the text itself remains important in the inter
pretive process, the reader, declares Jauss, plays an essential role.
Wolfgang Iser The German phenomenologist Wolfgang Iser borrows and

amends Jauss's ideas. Iser believes that any objecta stone, a house, or a
poemdoes not achieve meaning until an active consciousness recogni**
or registers this object. It is thus impossible to separate what is known (*
object) from the mind that knows it (human consciousness). Using th**
phenomenological ideas as the basis for his reader-oriented theory and p *
t.ce, Iser declares that the critic's job is not to dissect or explain the test. ^
behoves that once a text is read, the object and the reader the perceived *
essentially one ! Icnce, the critic's role is to examine and explain the text
feet on the reader. r
Imt, however, differentiates two kimts of renders Tin- first is tire bof1*
read.-, who "embodies all those ,m-dispositions necessary for a
work to exert ise its e ffe c t-,,^dispositions l.,id down not by an ernp'r
outside reality, but by the text itself. Consequently, (he implied te.rdr" I '
, roots firmly planted in the structure of the text (Iser, 1978),

has his or he implied reader is the reader im plied b y the text, o n e w h o is
other words t the overall effects of the text. T h e seco n d k in d o f
predispose r e a d e r or the p erson w ho p h y sically p ick s u p th e tex t
Ka^ e\ \ it It is this reader as opposed to the im plied read er w h o co m e s to
aa text shaped by particular cultural and personal norm s and p re ju d ice s. B y
itin e the implied reader, Iser affirm s the necessity o f exa m in in g th e te x t
jnthe interpretive process. At the sam e tim e, by ack n o w led g in g th e a ctu a l
reader, Iser declares the validity of an individual rea d er's resp on se to the text.
Like Jauss, Iser disavow s the N ew C ritical stance that a text has o n e an d
only one correct meaning and asserts that a text has m an y p o ssib le in te rp re
tations. For Iser, texts, in and of them selves, do not p ossess m ean in g . W h e n a
text is concretized by the reader (the p h en o m en o lo g ica l co n ce p t w h e re b y
the text registers in the re a d e r's co n scio u sn ess), the rea d e r a u to m a tic a lly
views the text from his or her personal w orldview . Since texts, h o w ev er, d o
not tell the reader everything that needs to be know n abou t a ch aracter, a sit
uation, a relationship, and other su ch textual elem ents, read ers m u st a u to
matically fill in these gaps," using their ow n know led ge base, g ro u n d ed as
it is in a particular worldview. In addition, each reader creates his or h er o w n
horizon of expectations that is, a re a d e r's e x p ecta tio n s a b o u t w h a t w ill o r
may or should happen next. (N ote the v ariation in m eaning Iser g iv es th is
term compared with Jauss, w ho coined it.) T h ese ho rizo n s of e x p e cta tio n s
change frequently because at the center of all stories is co n flict or d ra m atic
tension, often resulting in sudden loss, pain, u nexpected jo y or fear, an d at
times great fulfillm ent. Su ch ch an g es cau se a read er to m o d ify h is o r h e r
orizon of expectations to fit a text's p articu lar situation. For exam p le, w h e n ,
m Chapter 31 of the A dventures o f H u ckleberry Finn, H u ck d eclares th a t h e
Wl not write a letter to M iss W atson telling her the lo catio n of Jim , H u ck
openly chooses to side w ith Jim a g ain st the p recep ts o f H u c k 's so ciety. A
- - may ^ en assum e that H uck w ill treat Jim differently, for now Jim , the
novT ^*aS 3 cânce to becom e a free person. A ccording to Iser, the read er h as
sho estakbshed a h orizon o f e x p e cta tio n s. W h en , h o w ev er, in ju s t a few
ft-ade CâPters' Tom S aw y er talk s H u ck in to ch a in in g Jim to a ta b le , th e
Huck ma^ necessarily reform u late his or h er h o rizo n o f ex p e cta tio n s, for
j ls not heating Jim as a free m an, bu t once again as a slave,
ally sense of the text, in filling in the text's gaps, and in co n tin u -
va|U(, (>Pt)ng new horizons of exp ectation s, the reader u ses his or h er ow n
^Ccord^St< m/ Pc>rsonal and p u b lic e x p erien ces, and p h ilo so p h ica l b eliefs,
cm, 'nH t c a c h read er m ak es c o n c re te " the tex t, and e a ch co n -
inkandU)n *S P( rsonab thereby allow ing the new creatio n the tex t's m ean-
- ( ^(-ct on the reader to be unique
ti( <>' l * r , the reader is an active, essential player in the text's interpreta-
p ^ i t i n g part of the text as the story is read and concretized and, ind.s-
ns<ibly, becoming its coauthor.
Subjective Criticism
Student D re p a in ts the third group of reader-oriented critics who p i** ^

greatest emphasis on the reader in the interpretative p ess For these pSy.
chological or subjective critics, the reader s thoughts, beliefs and experi.
ences play a greater part than the actual text in shaping a work s meaning
Led by Norman Holland and David Bleich, these critics assert that we shape
and find our self-identities in the reading process.
Norman Holland Using Freudian psychoanalysis as the foundation for his

theory and practices formulated in the early 1970s, Norman Holland be
lieves that at birth we receive from our mothers a primary identity. We per-
sonalize this identity through our life's experiences, transforming it into our
own individualized identity theme that becomes the lens through which we
see the world. Textual interpretation, then, becomes a matter of working out
our own fears, desires, and needs to help maintain our psychological health.
Like Rosenblatt, Holland asserts that the reading process is a transaction
between the text and the reader. The text is indeed important because it con
tains its own themes, its own unity, and its own structure. A reader, however,
transforms a text into a private world, a place where one works out (through
the ego) his or her fantasies, which are, in fact, mediated by the text so they
will be socially acceptable.
For Holland, all interpretations are subjective. Unlike New Criticism, his
reader-oriented approach asserts that there exists no such thing as a correct
interpretation. From his perspective, there are as many valid interpretations
as there are readers because the act of interpretation is a subjective experi
ence where the text is subordinated to the individual reader.
David Bleich The founder of "subjective criticism," David Bleich agrees

with Holland's psychological explanation of the interpretive process, but
Bleich devalues the role the text plays, denying its objective existence.
Meaning, Bleich argues, does not reside in the text but is developed when the
reader works in cooperation with other readers to achieve the text's
collective meaning (what Bleich calls "the interpretation"). Only when each
reader is able to articulate his or her individual responses about the text
within a group, then and only then can the group, working together, negoti'
ate meaning. Such communally motivated negotiations ultimately deter
mine the text's meaning.
For Bleich, the starting point for interpretation is the reader's responses
to a text, not the text itself. Bleich states that these responses do not consth
tute the text's meaning because meaning cannot be found within a text or
within responses to the text. Rather, a text's meaning must be developed fro*
and out of the reader's responses, working in conjunction with other read
ers responses and with past literary and life experiences. In other wo*
Bloich differentiates between the reader's response(s) to a text (which for

Bleich can never be equated to a reader's interpretation) and the reader's in
terpretation or meaning, which must be developed communally in a class
room or similar setting.
For Bleich and his adherents, the key to developing a text's meaning is
the working out of one s responses to a text so these responses will be chal
lenged and amended and accepted by one's social group. Subjective critics
such as Bleich assert that when reading a text, a reader may respond to some
thing in the text in a bizarre and personal way. These private responses will,
through discussion, be pruned away by members of the reader's social
group. Finally, the group will decide what is the acceptable interpretation of
the text. As in Student D's interpretation cited at the beginning of this chapter,
the reader responds personally to some specific element in the text, seeks to
objectify this personal response, and then declares it to be an interpretation of
the text. Only through negotiations with other readers and other textsa pro
cess critics call intertextualitycan a reader develop the text's meaning.
A Tw o-step M ethodology
Although reader-oriented critics all believe the reader plays a part in discov
ering a text's meaning, just how small or large a part is debatable. Espousing
various theoretical assumptions, these critics must necessarily have different
methodologies for textual analysis. According to the contemporary critic
Steven Mailloux, all reader-oriented critics share a two-step procedure,
which they then adapt to their own theories. First, these critics all show that
a work gives a reader a task or something to do, and second, such tasks rep
resent the reader's response(s) or answer(s) to that task.
Returning, for example, to Student D: At the beginning of the chapter,
Student D's argument shows that she saw something in the text that triggered
her memories of her friend Rita. Her task is to discover what in the text trig
gered her memory and why. She moves, then, from the text to her own
thoughts, memories, and experiences. These personal experiences temporarily
overshadow the text, but she realizes that her personal reactions must in some
way become acceptable to her peers. She, therefore, compares Rita to Faith
Brown and herself to Rita, thereby objectifying her personal feelings while
having her interpretation deemed socially respectable in her interpretive
communitya term coined by the reader-oriented critic Stanley Fish to desig
nate a group of readers who share the same interpretive strategies.
Stanley Fish (1938-), a contemporary reader-oriented critic, has coined
the term affective stylistics or reception aesthetics to describe his reading
strategy. Like other theorists, Fish's approach to texts has developed through
time, with Fish periodically appending his theoretical and practical con
cerns. Presently, Fish argues that meaning inheres in the reader, not the text.
82 Chapter 4 Redder-oiicuti'd Criticism
i1>s ;n the reading community to which an
A h rx t'sm e a h in frh ed ecU m .^ sh c#n# the interpretive c o m * * *
individual reader belongs, or dept.dent on a reader s subject^
The interpretation of a text rprclive communities It is this com.
experience in one or more of't - invest meaning. Unlike the
munity or communities that u ^ a text is an illusion, for the ,ext is
Critics, Fish declares that the o t) ^ reader/ while engaged in the read-
a tabula rasa, a blank slate upo Fish, the text being held by the reader
ing process, writes the actual tex . projectS his or her understanding
is like a Rorschach blot on which tl ^ ^ one or more interpretiv
as filtered through cultural ass \ ^ determines the form and content
communities. In effect, it is tne tion that the text is a self-enclosed
" , - * " * * *
in theory and methods, manr Pre . n j Cultural Poetics, declare their

constructionism, feminism Marx and Cu es
membership in this broad c l a s s , I r e a d e r - o r i e n t e d theory and de
analysis provides its own i eo f? criticism. Such an eclectic member-
velops its unique methods ot practical c of mader-ori-
ship heralds the continued growth and ongoing y
pntpd criticism.
QUESTIONS FOR ANALYSIS
Since reader-oriented critics use a variety of methodologies, no particular

listing of questions can encompass all their concerns. Nevertheless, by
asking the following questions of Nathaniel Hawthorne's "Young
Goodman Brown," you can participate in both the theory and practice of
reader-oriented criticism:
Who is the actual reader?

Who is the implied reader?
Who is the ideal reader?
Who is the narratee?
What are some gaps you see in the text?
Can you list several horizons of expectations and show how they change in
Hawthorne's text from its beginning to its conclusion?
Using Jauss's definition of horizon of expectations, can you develop first on four
own, then with your classmates an interpretation of "Young Goodman Brown
' n as you dcvdop pmonal

......H II- --------------------------------------. ----------- .. - > * * ..,.*
Using Bteich s subjective criticism, can you state the difference between your re
sponse to Young Goodman Brown" and your interpretation?
In a classroom setting, develop your class's interpretive strategies for arriving at
the meaning of "Young Goodman Brown."
As you interpret Young Goodman Brown," can you cite the interpretive com
munity or communities to which you, the reader, belong? By so doing, you will
be identifying how this community or communities have influenced your
interpretation.
C R ITIQ U ES A N D R ESPO N SES
Like most schools of criticism that have emerged since the 1960s, reader-
oriented criticism is a collective noun embodying a variety of critical positions.
Unlike New Criticism 's "text and text alone" approach to interpretation
that claims that the meaning of a text is enclosed in the text itself, reader-
oriented critics emphasize the reader of a text, declaring that the reader is
just as much (or more) a producer of meaning as is the text itself. To vary
ing degrees, the reader helps create the meaning of any text. In approach
ing a work, the reader brings to the interpretive process his or her
forestructure, one's accrued life experiences, memories, beliefs, values,
and other characteristics that make an individual unique. In making sense
of the textwhat we call the interpretationthe elements of the reader's
forestructure interact, transact, or intermingle (depending on the reader's
theoretical stance), thereby producing the actual interpretation. Because
reader-oriented critics agree that an individual reader creates the text's
meaning, reader-orientated criticism declares that there can be no one cor
rect meaning for any text, but many valid interpretations. What the reading
process is and how readers read are major concerns for all reader-oriented
critics. Their answers to these and similar questions, however, are widely
divergent.
Reader-oriented criticism has been harshly critiqued by scholars who
believe that the text, not the reader, creates meaning. If multiple interpreta
tions of the same text can exist side by side, how can we ever say what a text
means? Can a text actually mean anything a reader says it means? Are there
no clearly delineated guidelines for interpretation? Are there no fixed val
ues in any text? If the reader is the producer of meaning, then the reader's
physical or mental condition while reading a text will directly influence the
interpretation, producing an array of bizarre and, more frequently than not,
misguided and pointless interpretations. In response, reader-oriented critics
provide a wide range of answers, from Wolfgang Iser's gap theory, to
Louise Rosenblatt's transactional theory, to Stanley Fish's rather relativistic
assumption that no text can exist until either the reader or an interpretive
community creates it.
84 C h ap ter 4 Reader-oriented C riticism
Presently render-oriented criticism is not as popular as it was in u

l% 0s or 70s. Although its theoretical assumption. < nt,cal theorists^
Louise Rosenblatt, David Bleieh, Hans Robert Jauss, Wolfgang ISer a
Norman Hollandstill influence literary criticism and in all probability wi^
continue to do so for decades, many reader-oritn e cri ics now emphas-
how certain groups read, asking such questions as ese. Do AfriCan
Americans read differently from Caucasians? How o women read? How d0
men read? How do gays or lesbians read? In other words, different schools
of literary criticism such as feminism, gender studies, and queer theory haye
embraced the principles of reader-oriented criticism, once again turning the
attention of theorists and critics to the reading process and the reader.
Mode rnity/Postmodern ism
Structuralism/
Poststructuralism:
Deconstruction
Everyone, left to his [or her] own devices, forms an idea about what goes on in lan
guage which is very far from the truth.
Ferdinand de Saussure, Lectures on General Linguistics
We are all mediators, translators.
Jacques Derrida, Interview
M O D E R N IT Y
Modernity is that which is ephemeral, fugitive, contingent upon the occasion; it is

half of art, whose other half is eternal and unchangeable.
Baudelaire, "The Painter of Modern Life"
For many historians and literary theorists alike, the Enlightenment (or the
Age of Reason in the eighteenth century) is synonymous with modernity
(from the Latin word modo, meaning "just now"). That its roots predate
this time period is unquestioned, with a few scholars even dating its be
ginnings to 1492, coincident with Columbus's journeys to the Americas,
and its overall spirit lasting until the middle of the twentieth century. At
the center of this view of the world lie two prominent features: a belief
that reason is humankind's best guide to life, and that science, above all
other human endeavors, can lead humanity to a new promised land.
Philosophically, m odernity rests on the foundations laid by Rene
Descartes (1596-1650), a French philosopher, scientist, and m athem ati
cian. Ultimately, declares Descartes, the only thing one cannot doubt is
one's own existence. Certainty and knowledge begin with the self. "I
think; therefore, I am " thus becomes the only solid foundation on which
85
86 Chapter 5 Modernity/Postmodernism
knowledge and a theory of knowledge can be built. For Descartes

tional essence freed from superstition, from human passions, e ra-
one's oftentimes irrational imagination will allow humankind to dis^01*1
truth about the physical world. c ver
Whereas Descartes' teachings elevated to new heights of the individ
rational essence and humankind's ability to reason, the scientific
Writin
and discoveries of both Francis Bacon (1561-1626) and Sir Isaac Ne 8s
(1643-1727) allowed science to be likewise coronated. Thanks to Bacon hT*
scientific method has become part of everyone's elementary and h e
school education. It is through experimentation, conducting experime t
making inductive generalizations, and verifying the results that one c
discover truths about the physical world. And thanks to Newton, the ph^
ical world is no longer a mystery, but a mechanism that operates accordin
to a system of laws that can be understood by any thinking, rational human
being who is willing to apply the principles of the scientific method to the
physical universe.
Armed with an unparalleled confidence in humankind's capacity to
reasonthe ability to inquire and to grasp necessary conditions essential for
seeking out such undoubtable truths as provided by mathematicsand the
assurance that science can lead the way to a complete understanding of the
physical world, the Enlightenment (i.e., modern) scholar was imbued with a
spirit of progress. Anything the enlightened mind set as its goal, so these
scholars believed, was attainable. Through reason and science, all poverty,
all ignorance, and all injustice would be finally banished.
Of all Enlightenment thinkers, Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) may best
exemplify the characteristics of modernity. Gleaned from self-portraits con
tained in his autobiography (first published in France in 1791, titled
Memoires De La Vie Privee, with the English translation appearing in 1793, ti
tled The Private Life of the Late Benjamin Franklin), Franklin is the archetypal
modern philosopher-scientist. Self-assured, Franklin declares that he
"pulled himself up by his own bootstraps," overcoming poverty and igno
rance through education to become America's first internationally known
and respected scientist-philosopher-diplomat. Believing in the power and
strength of the individual mind, he delighted in the natural world and de
cided early in life to know and explore all possible aspects of his universe. In
this process, he abandoned superstitions and myths, placing his trust in
science to lead him to truths about his world. Through observations, experi
ments, and conclusions drawn upon the data discovered by using the scien
tific method, Franklin believed he could obtain and know the necessary
truths for guiding him through life.
Similar to Descartes, Franklin does not abandon religion and replace it
with science. Holding to the tenets of deism, he rejects miracles, myths, an
much of what he called religious superstitions. What he does not reject: is
belief in the existence of God. He asserts, however, that God leaves it
Chapter 5 Modernity/Pcwtmodernism 87
human*** to each individual, to become the master of his or her own fate.
According to Franklin, individuals must find salvation within themselves.
By u nj? one s God-g.yen talent for reason and joining these rational abili
ties to the principles of science, each person, declares Franklin, can experi
ence and enjoy human progress.
For Franklin and other enlightened minds, truth is to be discovered sci
entifically, not through the unruly and passionate imagination or through
one s feelings or intuition. Indeed, what is to be known and discovered via
the scientific m ethod is reality: the physical world. All people, declares
Franklin, must know this world objectively and must learn how to investi
gate it to discover its truths.
Self-assured, self-conscious, and self-made, Franklin concludes that
all people possess an essential nature. It is humanity's moral duty to in
vestigate this nature contained w ithin ourselves and also to investigate
our environm ent through rational thinking and the methods of science so
we can learn and share the truths of the universe. By devoting ourselves to
science and to the m agnificent results that will necessarily follow, Franklin
proclaims that hum an progress is inevitable and will usher in a new
golden age.
Franklin and modernity's spirit of progress permeated humankind's be
liefs well into the twentieth century. For several centuries, modernity's chief
tenets that reality can be known and investigated and that humanity pos
sesses an essential nature characterized by rational thoughtbecame the
central ideas upon which many philosophers, scientists, educators, and writ
ers constructed their worldviews. Briefly put, modernity's core characteris
tics are as follows:
The concept of the self is a conscious, rational, knowable entity.
Reality can be studied, analyzed, and known.
Objective, rational truth can be discovered through science.
The methodology of science can and does lead to ascertaining truth.
The yardstick for measuring truth is reason.
Truth is demonstrable.
Progress and optimism are the natural results of valuing science and rationality.
Language is referential, representing the perceivable world.
In particular, writers and literary theoreticiansNew Critics, structural

ists, and othersbelieved that texts possessed some kind of objective exis
tence and could, therefore, be studied and analyzed, w ith appropriate
conclusions to follow from such analyses. Whether a text s actual value and
meaning were intrinsic or extrinsic was debatable; nevertheless, an aesthetic
text's meaning could be discovered and articulated. Such a basic assumption
concerning a text's m eaning was soon to be challenged by principles es
poused by what has been dubbed postmodernism.
88 Chapter 5 Modernity/Postinodernism
POSTSTRUCTURALISM OR POSTMODERNISM
Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodernism as incredulity toio

metanarratives.
Jean-Fran;ois Lyotard, "The P o stm o d e rn C onditj0
What is truth? How can truth be discovered? What is reality? Is thef* a

jective reality on which we can all agree? I so, ow can we est invests '
this reality so all humanity can understand the world in which we aVef *
prosper from such knowledge? Until the late s (wit a few notable P
ceptions), the worldview espoused by modernity and sy m b o lic iX'
Benjamin Franklin provided acceptable and workable answers to these qu y
tions. For Franklin and other modern thinkers, the primary form of dis
course is like a map. The map itself is a representation of reality as known
discovered, and detailed by humanity. By looking at a map, a traveler wh
holds these assumptions can see a delineated view of the world and obtain
an accurate picture of reality itself: the mountains, the rivers, the plains, the
cities, the deserts, and the forests. By placing his or her trust in this represen
tation of reality, the traveler can then plot a journey, feeling confident in the
accuracy of the map and its depictions. For the modern mind, objective real
ity as pictured on the map was knowable and discoverable by any intelligent
person who wished to do so.
With the inception of deconstruction as authored and portrayed in
Jacques Derrida's poststructural view of the world in the mid-1960s, however
modernity's understanding of reality is challenged and turned on its head by
postmodernism, meaning "after modernity" or "just after now," from its Latin
root meaning "just now." For Derrida and other postmodernists, there is no
such thing as "objective reality." For these thinkers, all definitions and depic
tions of truth are subjective, simply creations of human minds. Truth itself is
relative, depending on the nature and variety of cultural and social influences
in one s life. Because these poststructuralist thinkers assert that many truths
exist, not the truth, they declare that modernity's concept of one objective real
ity must be disavowed and replaced by many different concepts, each a valid
and reliable interpretation and construction of reality.
Postmodern thinkers reject modernity's representation of discourse (the
map) and replace it with a collage. Unlike the fixed, objective nature of a map,
a collage s meaning is always in flux, always changing. Whereas the viewer of
a map relies on and obtains meaning and direction from the map itself, the
viewer o a collage actually participates in the production of meaning. Unlike
a map, which allows one interpretation of reality, a collage permits many poS'
comhhT!n'n8S7 he VICWer (or " reader") can Simply juxtapose a variety "
7 f lma8es. thereby constantly changing the meaning of**
collage. Each v.ewer, then, creates his or her own subjective picture of real#
C hap ter 5 M od ern ity/P ostm od ern ism 89
To say postmodernism popped onto the American literary scene with

the coming of Derrida to America in 1966 would, of course, be inaccurate.
Although historians disagree about who actually coined the term, there is
general agreement that the word first appeared in the 1930s. Its seeds, how
ever, had already germinated far earlier in the writings of Friedrich
Nietzsche (18441900). As Zarathustra, the protagonist of Nietzsche's Thus
Spake Zarathustra (1883), proclaims the death of God, simultaneously the
death knell begins to sound for the demise of objective reality and ultimate
truth. World Wars I and II, a decline in the influence of Christianity and indi
vidualism, and the appearance of a new group of theologians led by Thomas
Altizer, who in the 1950s echoed Nietzsche's words that God is dead, all con
tributed to the obsolescence of objective reality and of the autonomous
scholar who seeks to discover ultimate reality.
Beginning in the 1960s and continuing to the present, the voices of the
French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1930-2004), the French cultural histo
rian Michel Foucault (1926-1984), the aesthetician Jean-Franôis Lyotard
(1924-1998), and the ardent American pragmatist Richard Rorty (1931-2007)
declare unequivocally the death of objective truth. These leading articulators
of postmodernism assert that modernity failed because it searched for an ex
ternal point of reference God, reason, and science, am ong others on
which to build a philosophy. For these postmodern thinkers, there is no such
point of reference because there is no ultimate truth or inherently unifying
element in the universe and, thus, no ultimate reality.
According to postm odernism, all that is left is difference. We must ac
knowledge, they say, that each person shapes his or her own concepts of real
ity. Reality, then, becomes a human construction shaped by each individual's
dominant social group. There exists no center, nor one all-encompassing ob
jective reality, but as many realities as there are people. Each person's inter
pretation of reality will necessarily be different. No individual or group can
claim it alone understands or possesses absolute truth. Tolerance of each
other's points of view, therefore, becomes the postmodern maxim.
Because postmodern philosophy is constantly being shaped, reshaped,
defined, redefined, and articulated by its adherents, no single voice can ade
quately represent it or serve as an archetypal spokesperson, as Franklin does
for modernity. By synthesizing the beliefs of Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard, and
Rorty, however, we can hypothesize what this representative postm odern
thinker would possibly espouse:
I believe, like my forebears before me, that we, as a race of people, will see
progress, but only if we all cooperate. The age of the lone scholar, working dili
gently in the laboratory, is over. CTooperation among scholars from all fields is
vital. Gone are the days of individualism. Gone are the days of conquest. Now
is the time for tolerance, understanding, and collaboration.
Because our knowledge always was and always will be incomplete, we
must focus on a new concept: holism. We must realize that we all need each
tv/Postmodernism
90 Chapter 5 M lltr s on the nature of reality. We must
us w',h vaiid interprc,a,,ons *

tWlinss. an^ " ' . . no such thing as objective reality
S ^ w e have finally come ^ . ^ e truth is perspectival, depending upon
luusTlearntoâccepteacj^*ggba soctety^temniuif lrom each other while cele-

live side by side, in a pluralism
brating our differences. undiscoverable-absolute truth-and
We must stop trying to dtscover , hl for one person may not be right for
openly acknowledge that wha pen-mindedness, not closed-mmdedness; tol-
another. Acceptance, not cntrcrsm, op ^ bKome ,he gu,dmg pnncples of
erance, not bigotry; and k m noth^ ,vcs and others for not having pos
eur lives. When we stop' then will we be able to spend more time
sessing, o, knowing truth, * Waning, as ,oge,her we work and play,
interpreting our lives and givmg
. . , arp aDDiied to literary interpretation, the post-
When such Principles PP as the mea n in g -o r , especially, the
modernist reall^ S * aesthetic text exists. Like looking at a collage, mean-
correct meaning o fan aes with a text because meaning does not
ing develops as a reader ^ ^ reader's view of truth is perspec-
least as many interpretations as there are readers. , _ - -

x-n
. 11 ky/Â- mc m'c rnrp rh<5r3CtGnStlCS
A skepticism or rejection of grand metanarratives to explain reality

The concept of the self as ever-changing
No objective reality, but many subjective interpretations
Truth as subjective and perspectival, dependent on cultural, social, and pers
influences
No "one correct" concept of ultimate reality
No metatheory to explain texts or reality
No "one correct" interpretation of a text.
M O D E R N IT Y T O M O D E R N IS M
tv with
Rooted in the philosophy and ideals of the Enlightenment, modern* y
its accompanying philosophical, political, scientific, and ethical idea L*it
vides much of the basis for intellectual thought from the 1700s to the m
C hapter 5 Mod
crn ity/ Postmodernism 91
of the twentieth century. World War I, however, marks a
of modernity s core beliefs, such as the objective status of reality and the
fixed nature of aesthetic forms. Employing unconventional stylistic tech
niques such as stream of consciousness and multiple-narrated stories, artists
and writers began to emphasize the subjective, highlighting how "seeing" or
"reading" actually occurs rather than investigating the actual object being
seen or read. Characterized by a transnational focus, literary artists blurred
the established distinctions among the various genres, rejecting previously
established aesthetic theories, choosing to highlight unconscious or subcon
scious elements in their works by employing the psychoanalytic theories of
Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung. Decentering the individual and introducing
ambiguity and fragm entation, modernism began to see life as a collage
rather than a map.
Partly in answer to the growing skepticism and the rising sense of mean
ingless of both life and art, a new way of examining reality and language
arose in France in the 1950s, structuralism, a term coined in 1929 by the
Russian Formalist Roman Jakobson. Structuralism asserts an overall unity
and significance to every form of communication and social behavior.
Grounded in structural linguistics (the science of language), structural
ism uses the techniques, methodologies, and vocabulary of linguistics, offer
ing a scientific view of how we achieve meaning not only in literary works
but also in every cultural act.
To understand structuralism, we must trace its historical roots to the lin-
guistic writings and theories of Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss professor
VW * i ^
O 4-1 1 V1 Af 1 Tf 1C h i e CC1_
and linguist of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It is his sci
entific investigations of language and language theory that provide the basis
for structuralism's unique approach to literary analysis.
STRUCTU RA LISM : IT S H ISTO RIC A L DEVELOPMENT
Pre-Saussurean Linguistics
Throughout the nine

linguistics, was the
philologists, d e scrib e -,---- ,
92 Chapter 5 M odemity/Postmodemism
to discover similarities and relationships. Their approach to lane

was diachronic-that is, they traced language change throUgho
panses of time, discovering, for example, how a particular pÛ*
such as a word or sound, in one language had changed etymoi^^ôn'
phonologically over several centuries and whether a similar o
be noted in other languages. Using a cause-and-effect relation hê c^ld
basis for their research, the philologists' main emphasis was the tv* ^ the
development of languages. r'IstriCaj
Such an emphasis reflected the nineteenth-century philologi
ical assumptions concerning the nature of language. Langua S
lieved, mirrored the structure of the world it imitated and, t h e r e f R e
structure of its own. Known as the mimetic theory of language thT ^ n
tic hypothesis asserts that words (either spoken or written) are" 1S
things in the world, each word having its own referentthe ob' for
or idea that is represented and/or symbolized by that word
this theory, the symbol (a word) equals a thing: 0rding t0
Symbol (word) = Thing
Saussure's Linguistic Revolution
In the first decade of the 1900s, a Swiss philologist and teacher, Ferdinand de
Saussure (1857-1913), began questioning these long-held ideas and, by so
doing, triggered a reformation in language study. Through his research and
innovative theories, Saussure changed the direction and subject matter of
linguistic studies. His Course in General Linguistics, a compilation of his
1906-1911 lecture notes published posthumously by his students in 1916, is
one of the most influential works of modem linguistics and forms the basis
for structuralist literary theory and practical criticism. Through the efforts of
this pioneer of modern linguistics, nineteenth-century philology evolved
into the more multifaceted science of twentieth-century linguistics.
Saussure began his linguistic revolution by affirming the validity and ne
cessity of the diachronic approach to language study used by such nine
teenth-century philologists as the Grimm brothers and Karl Vemer. Using this
diachronic approach, these linguists discovered the principles governing con
sonantal pronunciation changes that occurred in Indo-European languages
(the language group to which English belongs) over many centuries. Wh^
not abandoning a diachronic examination of language, Saussure introduced
the synchronic approach, a method that focuses on any given language3
one particular tim e-a single moment-and that emphasizes the whole s a
of a particular language at that time. Attention is on how the language and
^wnnlH *1' n0t nJ tracin8 the historical development of a single ^
d occur in a diachronic analysis. By highlighting the activity
Chapter 5 M odernity/Postm odernism 93
language system and how it operates rather than its evolution, Saussure drew
attention to the nature and composition of language and its constituent parts.
For example, along with exam ining the phonological antecedents of the
English sound b as in the word toy (a diachronic analysis), Saussure ope
a new avenue of investigation, asking how the b sound is related to other
sounds in use at the same time by speakers of Modern English (a synchronic
analysis). This new concern necessitated a rethinking of language theory and
a reevaluation of the aims of language research, and it finally resulted in
Saussure s articulating the basic principles of modem linguistics.
Unlike m any of his contem porary linguists, Saussure rejected the
mimetic theory of language structure. In its place, he asserted that language
is primarily determined by its own internally structured and highly system
atized rules. These rules govern all aspects of a language, including the
sounds its speakers will identify as meaningful, the grouping of various
combinations of these sounds into words, and the process whereby these
words may be arranged to produce meaningful communication within a
given language.
The Structure of Language
According to Saussure, all languages are governed by their own internal

rules that do not mirror or imitate the structure of the world. Emphasizing
the systematized nature of language, Saussure asserts that all languages are
composed of basic units called ernes. The task of a linguist is to identify these
units (sometimes called paradigms or models) and/or to identify their rela
tionships among symbols like the letters of the alphabet, for example in a
given language. This task becomes especially difficult when the ernes in the
linguist's native language and those in an unfamiliar language under inves
tigation differ. According to Saussure, the basic building block or unit of
language is the phonem e the smallest meaningful (significant) sound in a
language. The number of phonemes differs from language to language, with
the least number of total phonemes for any one language being around
eleven (Rotokas, a language spoken by approximately four thousand people
in Bougainville, an island east of New Guinea) and the most being 112, found
in several tonal languages. American English, for example, consists of ap
proximately forty-three to forty-five phonemes, depending on the specific
dialect of American English being spoken. Although native speakers of
American English are capable of producing phonemes found in other lan
guages, it is these forty-five distinct sounds that serve as the building blocks
of American English. For example, the first sound heard in the word pin is
the /p/ phoneme, the second /I/, and the last /n/. A phoneme is identified
in writing by enclosing the grapheme the written symbol that represents
the phoneme's sound in virgules or diagonal lines.
94 Chapter
5 . M c * r n ity / P * m o d en iSm
M
makes a distinct sound that is meanly
Although each phoneme ~ fanguage, in a c t u a l i t y ^ ^ l ^
tecognUable to speaker P identica, speech sounds called
composed of a family * " y f , phoneme is /p/, and in the w > .
S t a n c e , in the word pit, the ^ appears
the second phoneme * To validate this statement, sim > i s ,
iK pronunciation is siign y ^ .nches (rom your mouth and F y ^
the palm of your hand mediately by the word spin. You will quickly "'vi
a s s s * z x x g & i *
Telling the difference among suu,.u,,. o -------- , ^nation
the pronunciation
pronunciati of a phoneme changes the m eaning of a group 0 f p h o W
- ------ ;hpn a simple
n-mie variation
vau^ inu aMphonem e's prnn eiês
sPronuncia-
a word), 01
the letter t represents the sound /./, bu, is there
enunciation for this sound whenever and wherever .. appears it,
Enelish word? Is the t in the word tip,for instance, pronounce
t Z t o v ?Obviously not-the first t is aspirated, or pronounced with a greater
force of air, more than the t in slop. In either word, however, a speaker |
English could still identify the /t/ as a phoneme or a distinct sound. If we
place the 1 in tip with a d , we now have dip, the difference between the two
words being the sounds A / and /d/. Upon further analysis, we find that
these sounds are pronounced in the same location in the mouth but with one
difference: whereas /d/ is voiced or pronounced with the vocal cords vibrat
ing, /t / is unvoiced, with the vocal cords remaining basically still. This differ
ence between the sounds /t/ and /d/ allows us to say that /1/ and /d/ are
phonemes or distinct sounds in English. Whether the eme is a sound or a min
imal unit of grammar such as the adding of an s in English to form most
plurals or any other distinct category of a language, Saussure's basic premise
operates: within each eme, distinctions depend on differences.
How phonemes and allophones arrange themselves to produce mean
ingful speech in any language is not arbitrary but is governed by a pre
scribed set of rules developed through time bv the speakers of a language.
For example, in Modern American English (1755 to the present), no English
word can end with the two phonemes /m/ and /b/. In Middle English
(1100-1500), these phonemes could combine to form the two terming
sounds of a word, resulting, for example, in the word lamb, where the //
and /b/ were both pronounced. Over time, the rules of spoken English have
changed so that when lamb appears r r ------ --- in m
Modern
u u v w i a iEnglish,
^ i/b/i has^ lost'5
nhnnom iP nn _ , - _ O ' , ,
phonemic value. The study of the rules governing the
sound in a linguistic system is called phonology, and the r t sd v ) o f the pr0'
duction of these sounds is known as phonetics. , |anguagelS,
In addition to phonemes, another major building block o ârrUtxabca
the morpheme, the smallest part of a word that has lexical
significance. Lexical refers to the base or root meaning of .word, * * *
C h ap ters Modernity/Postmodernism 95
refers to those elements of language that express relationship,

g r a m m a tic a l
among words or groups of words, such as the inflections {-ed|, {-), and |-ing)
that carry tense, number, gender, and so on. (Note that in print, morphemes
a * placed in braces.) Sinulnr to the phoneme, the number of lexical and
grammatical morphemes varies from language to language. In American
English, the num ber of lexical morphemes far outdistances the relative
handful of grammatical morphemes (ten or so). For instance, in the word
reaper, {reap) is a lexical morpheme, meaning "to ripple flax" and |-er) is a
grammatical morpheme, meaning 'one who." All words must have a lexical
morpheme (hence their great number), but not every word need have a
grammatical morpheme. How the various lexical and grammatical mor
phemes combine to form words is highly rule-governed and is known in
modern linguistics as the study of morphology.
Another major building block in the structure of language is the actual
arrangement of words in a sentence, a language's syntax. Just as the place
ment of phonemes and morphemes in individual words is a rule-governed
activity, so is the arrangement of words in a sentence. For example, although
native speakers of English would understand the sentence "John threw the
ball into the air," such speakers would have difficulty ascertaining the mean
ing of "Threw air the into ball the John." Why? Native speakers of English
have mastered which strings of morphemes are permitted by syntactic rules
and which are not. Those that do not conform to these rules do not form
English sentences and are called ungrammatical. Those that do conform
to the established syntactic structures are called sentences or grammatical
sentences. In most English sentences, for example, the subject ("John") pre
cedes the verb ("threw"), followed by the complement ("the ball into the air").
Although this structure can at times be modified, such changes must follow
tightly prescribed rules of syntax if a speaker of English is to be understood.
Having established the basic building blocks of a sentencephonemes,
morphemes, words, and syntax language also provides us with one addi
tional body of rules to govern the various interpretations or shades of mean
ing such combinations of words can evoke: semantics. Unlike morphemes
(the meanings of which can be found in any good dictionary) and unlike the
word stock of a language its lexicon the semantic features (the proper
ties of words that show facets of meaning) are not so easily defined.
Consider, for example, the following sentences:
"Giuseppe is a nut."
"I found a letter on South Washington Street."
"Get a grip, Rusty."
To understand each of these sentences, a speaker or reader needs to un

derstand the semantic features that govern an English sentence because each
of the above sentences has several possible interpretations. In the first sen-
tence, the speaker must grasp the concept of metaphor; in the second, lexica
* C h a p 5 . M o d e m i.y / P ^ o d e m .sm
96 t - n a j . 'IV*
1
ambiguity; and in the third, idiomatic structures. Unless the

turns are consciously or unconsciously known and understood
or listener, problems of interpretation may arise. As with the ^
blocks of language, an understanding o f semantics is nece tiler
communication in any language. ssary fQji c^'ear
Langue and Parole
Bv age five or six, native speakers of English or any other language hav
S l y and unconsciously mastered them language s complex syste^
mles or its gramma^-their language's phonology morphology, synt m
semanticswhich enables them to, parhc.pate m language communfca^
In effect, these young native speakers have mastered their language .
scriptive grammarthat is, the actual use of a language by its speaker
without reference to established norms of correctness or good" or "ba(j.
usage. They have not, however, mastered such advanced elements as all
the semantic features of their language, nor have they mastered its
prescriptive grammar: the prescribed rules of English usage often invented
propagated, and enforced by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century purists
who believed that there were certain constructions that all educated people
should know and employ, such as using the nominative form of a pronoun
after an intransitive linking verb as in the sentence "It is I." What these five-
or six-year-old native speakers of a language have learned Saussure dubs
langue, the structure of the language that is mastered and shared by all its
speakers.
Although langue emphasizes the social aspect of language and an under
standing of the overall language system, Saussure calls an individual's actual
speech utterances parolethat is, linguistic features such as loudness or soft
ness that are overlaid on language's structure, its langue. For example, two
speakers can utter the same sentence, such as "I see a rat." One speaker
shouts the words while another whispers them. Both utterances are examples
of parole and how individuals personalize language. Speakers can generate
countless examples of individual utterances (parole), but these will all be gov
erned by the language's system, its langue. It is the task of the linguist
aussure believes, to infer a language's langue from the analysis of many in*
stances of parole. In other words, for Saussure, the proper study of linguist^
is e system ( angue), not the individual utterances of its speakers (parole)-
Saussure's Redefinition of a Word
t!ai lan8ua8 a * systems that operate a c c o rd in g ^

"able rules and that they need to be investigated both diachronic#'
Chapter 5 M odernity/Postm odernism 97
Signifier
Sign =
Signified
For example, when we hear the sound ball, the sound is the signifier and
the concept of a ball that comes to our minds is the signified. Like the two sides
of a sheet of paper, the linguistic sign is the union of these two elements. As
oxygen combines with hydrogen to form water, Saussure says, so the signifier
joins with the signified to form a sign that has properties unlike those of its
parts. Accordingly for Saussure, a word represents a sign, not a referent in the
objective world. Unlike previous generations of philologists who believed that
we perceive things (word = thing) and then translate them into units or mean
ing, Saussure revolutionizes linguistics by asserting that we perceive signs.
Furthermore, the linguistic sign, declares Saussure, is arbitrary: the rela
tionship between the signifier (ball) and the signified (the concept of ball) is a
matter of convention. The speakers of a language have simply agree t at
the written or spoken sounds or marks represented by bal wi equa t e
concept ball. With few exceptions, proclaims Saussure, there is no natural
link between the signifier and the signified, nor is there any natura re a ion
ship b e tw e e n th e lin g u is t ic sign and what it represents. . .
If, as Saussure maintains, there is no natural link between the linguistic
sign and the reality it represents, how do we know the deference between
one sign and another? In other words, how does language create mea g.
We know what a sign means, says Saussure, because .: dtffers from all other
signs By com paring and contrasting one sign with other stgns, we learn to
dfstinguish each individual sign. Individual signs, then, can have mean.ng
Wrthrn the system of sound from tail, and pipe.
U k w S e ,' w T know the"concept bu g" because U te e ^ m

truck," grass," and k ite." As Saussure declares, In language
only differences." , . differential, Saussure con-
Because signs are arbitrary, convert i ^ ^ examination of isolated
eludes that the proper study of g_g
lan them. He ass
entities, but the system of relationship 8 themselves. Because lan-
Ple/that individual words cannot have mea ^ and other components,
8uage is a system of rules governing soun / ^ that system. To know
individual words obtain their meanings / must study the system
anguage and how it functions, Saussure declares, w
C hapter 5 M od ern ity/P ostm od em ism
98
(langue), not individual utterances (parole) that operate according lo lh?
For Saussure, language is the primary sign system whereby we structure

our world. Language's structure, he believes, is not unlike that of any other
sign system of social behavior, such as fashion, table manners, and sports.
Like language, all such expressions of social behavior generate meaning
through a system of signs. Saussure proposed a new science called semiology
to study how we create meaning through these signs in all our social behav
ioral systems. Since language was the chief and most characteristic of all
these systems, Saussure declared, it was to be the main branch of semiology.
The investigation of all other sign systems w ould be patterned after lan
guage because like language's signs, the meanings of all signs are arbitrary,
conventional, and differential.
Although semiology never became the important new science Saussure
envisioned, a similar science was being proposed in America almost simul
taneously by philosopher and teacher Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914).
Called semiotics, this science borrowed linguistic methods used by Saussure
and applied them to all meaningful cultural phenomena. Meaning in society,
this science of signs declares, can be systematically studied, both in studying
how this meaning occurs and in understanding the structures that allow it to
operate. Distinguishing among the various kinds of signs, semiotics contin
ues to develop today as a particular field of study. Because it uses structural
ist methods borrowed from Saussure, semiotics and structuralism are terms
often used interchangeably, although the former denotes a distinct field of
study, and the latter is more an approach and method of analysis.
ASSUMPTIONS OF STRUCTURALISM
Borrowing the linguistic vocabulary, theory, and m ethods from Saussure a *
to a smaller degree from Peirce, structuralists their studies being various ]
ca led structuralism, semiotics, stylistics, and narratology to name a fe *'
beheve that codes, s.gns, and rules govern all h u m an social and cu>
eua,!;.T/fT h 8 communica>i<>n. W hether that communication is * > ..
Stma.ized c o 2 r ! , & t a d % . literature, each
, / o
behind these* . .1 j . ...
to discover how all the p a r t s ,'ullVu,ual practices themselves. T
Structuralists find ,n * u,H<'ther and function.
function, . s c0
ponents of a system wu ln the
relationship am ong the v< various
ol1
V W ' " ' n nPpiied to literatu re, this princip le btC
Chapters Modemity/Postmode rmsm 99
revolutionary.
^ intoFor
thpstructuralists,
rmvlitinnc the *proper studu of
* htUt1y of literature
tu t now involves
m< mry ">t the conditions surrounding the act of interpretation itself
(how literature conveys meaning), not an in-depth investigation of an indi
vidual work^Smce an individual work can express only those values and be-
|icfs Of he system o f which ,t is a part, structuralists emphasize the system
(langue) whereby tex s relate to each other, not an examination of an isolated
text (parole). They believe that a study of the system of rules that govern lit-
erary interpretation becomes the critic's primary task
Such a belief presupposes that the structure of literature is similar to the
structure of language. Like language, say the structuralists, literature is a
self-enclosed system of rules that is composed of language. Literature, like
language, needs no outside referent except its own rule-governed, but so
cially constrained, system. Before structuralism, literary theorists discussed
the literary conventions that is, the various genres or types of literature,
such as the novel, the short story, or poetry. Each genre, it was believed, had
its own conventions or acknowledged and acceptable way of reflecting and
interpreting life. For example, in poetry, a poet could write in nonsentences,
using symbols and other forms of figurative language to state a theme or to
make a point. For these prestructuralist theorists, the proper study of litera
ture was an examination of these conventions and of how either individual
texts used applicable conventions to make meaning or how readers used
these same conventions to interpret the text. Structuralists, however, seek
out the system of codes that they believe conveys a text's meaning. For them,
how a text conveys meaning rather than what meaning is conveyed is at the
center of their interpretive methodology that is, how a symbol or a meta
phor, for exam ple, im parts m eaning is of special interest. For instance, in
Nathaniel H aw thorne's "Young Goodman Brow n," most readers assume
that the darkness of the forest equates with evil and that images of light rep
resent safety. O f particular interest to the structuralist is how (not that) dark
ness comes to represent evil. A structuralist would ask why darkness more
frequently than not represents evil in any text and what sign system or code
is operating that allows readers to interpret darkness as evil intertextually or
in all or most texts they read. To structuralists, how a symbol or any other lit
erary device functions is of chief importance, not how literary devices imi
tate reality or express feelings. .
In addition to em phasizing the system of literature and not individual
texts, structuralism claim s it demystifies literature. By explaining iterature
as a system of signs encased in a cultural frame that allows that system to op-
erate, say the structuralists, a literary work can no longer be considered a
mystical or magical relationship between the author and the reader, a place
w h ere author and reader share emotions, ideas, and truth. A scientific and an
objective analysis of how readers interpret texts, not a transcendental, m u
itive, or transactional response to any one text, leads to meaning Similar y
an author's intentions can no longer be equated to the text s overall meaning
Chapter 5 Mixiemity/P<tmdernism
100
bocdiiM-1meaning is determined by the- system that governs,he w,jto

I , M ,1 author's personal quirks. And no longer can the text be a,?. a"
mints,1an object whose meaning is contained solely within itself. All ^
d .,re structuralists, am part of the shared system of meaning ,hat K
textual, not text specific. In other words, all texts refer readers to lh(.r * *
Meaning, claim the structuralists, can be expressed only through ,his sha
system of relations, not in an author's stated .mentions or the reader'*
vate or public experiences. .
Declaring both isolated text and author to be of little importance, *trUf
turalism attempts to strip literature of its magical powers or so-called hidda,
meanings that can be discovered by only a small, elite group 0f highl"
trained specialists. Meaning can be found, it declares, by analyzing the sy$.
tem of rules that comprise literature itself.
METHODOLOGIES OF STRUCTURALISM
Like other approaches to textual analysis, structuralism follows neither one

methodological strategy nor one set of ideological assumptions. Although
most structuralists use many of Saussure's ideas in formulating their theo
retical assumptions and foundations for their literary theories, how these as
sumptions are employed when applied to textual analysis varies greatly. A
brief examination of five structuralists or subgroups will help highlight
structuralism's varied approaches to textual analysis.
Claude Levi-Strauss
One of the first scholar-researchers to implement Saussure's principles of lin

guistics to narrative discourse in the 1950s and 1960s was the French anthro
pologist Claude Levi-Strauss (1908-2009). Attracted to the rich symbols in
myths, Levi-Strauss spent years studying myths from around the world.
Myth, he assumed, possessed a structure like language. Accordingly, each
individual myth was an example of parole. What he wanted to discover was
myt s angue, its overall structure that allows individual examples (parole)
on a" d have meanng. In his work "The Structural Study of Myths'
i f.VI rauspresents his structural analysis of why myths from di *
serts, s i m i W - A u m y ,h s ' sim iiarities r e s i d e ' h e as'
runmnTthnmvh myths' U vi-Stranss identified recurrent them

sPZ V S 3 v , h ' h0mn SUCh ,hemes transcended culture and
tures, which he called^ nVnt^S an^ êar*s of all people. These basic
e mythemes, are similar to the primary building b
/
Chapters Modernity/Postmodernism 101
of language, the phonemes. Like phonemes mvti,
through their relationships within the mythic f'nd eanin8 in and
such relationships often involve oppositions For f i f nd. ,ke Phonemei/
phonemes are similar in that they are Z ^ Z T ^ ' th? / b / and
denly stop a stream of air. They differ or onnnc y USI8 the ^'Pto sud_
pect: whether the air passing through the w i n d m nly one as*
p ,c e d and u n v o ic e !
vibrating vocal cords produce / b / and nnn.,;u a- 7 sPeecn/
mytheme finds its meaning through opposition. Hating or living X n rtp a r-
ents, falling m love with someone who does or who d L not love y 'u . and
chenshing or abandoning one's children all exemplify the dual or opposing
nature of mythemes. The rules that govern how t h L mythemes may
combined constitute my th s structure or grammar. The meaning of any indi-
v,dual myth, then, depends on the interaction and order of the m ytL m es
Wthm the story. Out of this structural pattern develops the myth's meaning.
When applied to a specific literary work, the intertextuality of myth be
comes evident. For example, in Shakespeare's Lear, the title character
overestimates the value and support of children when he trusts Regan and
Goneril, his two eldest daughters, to take care of him in his old age. He also
underestimates the value and support of children when he banishes his
youngest and most-loved daughter, Cordelia. Like the binary opposition
that occurs between the / b / and / p / phonemes, the binary opposition of
underestimating versus overestimating love automatically occurs when
reading K in g Lear because such mythemes have occurred in countless other
texts and immediately ignite emotions within the reader.
Like our unconscious mastery of our language's langue, we also master
myth's structure. Our ability to grasp this structure, says Levi-Strauss, is in
nate. Like language, myths are simply another way we classify and organize
our world.
Roland Barthes
Researching and writing in response to Levi-Strauss was his contemporary,
the eminent French structuralist Roland Barthes (19151980). Barthes con
tribution to structuralist theory is best summed up in the title of his most fa
mous text, S/Z (1970). In Honore Balzac's Sarrasine, Barthes noted that the
first s is pronounced as the s in snake, and the second as the z in zoo. Both
phonemes, /s/ and /z/, respectively, are a minimal pair that is, both are
produced by using the sam e articulatory organs and in the same place in
the mouth, the difference being that /s/ is unvoiced (no vibration of vocal
cords) and /z/ is voiced (vibration of vocal cords when air is b owing
through the breath channel). Like all minimal pairs /p/and /b/, /t/ and
/d/, and /k/ and /g/, for exam ple this pair operates in what Barthes
102 Chapter 5 Modernity/Postmodemism
calls b in ary o p p o sitio n . Even within a phoneme, binary 0

for a phoneme is, as Saussure reminded us, a class exc.
sounds called allophones, which differ p h o n e tica lly __ thaTf*^ ^ entk^j
changing the pronunciation but not altering the recognizabt ^ sli8htly
Borrowing and further developing Saussure's work, Barthes rf6 P^neiJ>e
all language is its own self-enclosed system based on binarv nn 6C ares that
difference). 7 peratlons (i-e
Barthes then applies his assumption that meaning develop
difference to all social contexts, including fashions, familial relatio fU^
ing, and literature, to name a few. When a p p lie d to literature, an ind^- ^
text is simply a messagean example o f p a r o le that must be inter'1
by using the appropriate codes or signs or binary operations that fomuh*
basis o f th e entire system, the langue. Only through recognizing the code6
or binary operations within the text, says Barthes, can the message en
coded within the text be explained. For example, in Nathaniel Hawthorne's
"Young Goodman Brow n" most readers intuitively know that young
Goodman Brown will come fa c e - t o - fa c e w ith ev il when he enters the for
est. W hy? Because one code or binary operation that we all seemingly
know is that light im p lie s g o o d a n d d a r k ev il. Brown thus enters the dark
forest and leaves the light of his home, only to fin d th e " false light" of evil
emanating fr o m th e artificial light the fires that light the baptismal ser
vice of those b e in g baptized into Satan's leg io n s. By finding other binary
o p p o s i t i o n s w ith in th e tex t a n d showing how these oppositions interre
late, the s tr u c tu r a lis t can then decode Hawthorne's text and explain its
m e a n in g .
S u ch a process abandons or dism isses the im portance of the author, any
h is to r ic a l o r litera ry period, or particular textual elements or genres. Rather
than d is c o v e r in g any e le m e n t o f truth within a text, this methodology shows
the process o f decod ing a text in relationship to the codes provided by the
structure o f language itself.
V la d im ir P ro p p a n d N a rra to lo gy
Expanding Levi-Strau ss's lin g u istic m odel o f m yths, a group of structuralists

called n a r r a to lo g is ts began a n o th e r k in d o f stru ctu ralism : structuralist
narratology, the science o f narrative. Like Saussure and Levi-Strauss, these
stru ctu ralists illu strate how a sto ry 's m eaning d evelops from its overa
structure, its langue, rather than from each individual story's iso la ted theme.
N arratology's overriding concern is the narrative structure of a text. What is
the interrelationship o f a n arrativ e's con stitu en t p arts, ask n arratolog ists,
and how are these parts constructed to shape the narrative itself? What are
the rules" that govern the form ation of plot? O f p o in t o f view? O f narrator.
'Jt audience?
Chapters Modernity/Postmodernism 103
Like other critics, narratologists amend and borrow ideas from other
reading strategies to help shape their ideas. Narratology borrows ele
ments from both the French structuralists such as Ldvi-Strauss and from
Russian Formalist critics such as Vladimir Propp (1895-1970). In his influ
ential text M orphology o f the Folktale (1928), Propp investigates Russian
fairy tales to decode their langue. According to his analysis, all folk or
fairy tales are based on thirty-one fixed elements, or what Propp calls
narrative functions or narratemes, that occur in a given sequence. Each
function identifies predictable patterns that central characters, such as the
hero, the villain, or the helper, enact to further the plot of the story. Any
story may use any number of these elements, such as "accepting the call to
adventure," "recognizing the hero," and "the punishing of the villain,"
among others, but each element occurs in its logical and proper sequence.
Other critics, notably Paul Vehvilainen, have simplified Propp's thirty-one
functions into a five-point system that, like Propp's, always occur in the
same order:
1. A lack of something exists.

2. This lack forces the hero to go on a quest to eliminate this lack.
3. On the quest, the hero encounters a magical helper.
4. The hero is subjected to one or more tests.
5. After having passed the test(s), the hero receives a reward.
Like Propp's thirty-one narratemes, these simplified five basic functions can
be applied to most fairy tales.
Applying Propp's narratological principles to specific literary works
is both fun and simple. For example, in Nathaniel H aw thorne's short
story "Young Goodman Brow n," Goodman Brown, the protagonist, is
given a task to do: meet someone in the forest after dark. Upon entering
the forest, Brown soon encounters the villain, who attempts to take Brown
deeper and deeper into the heart of the forest. Various helpers appear to
propel the plot forward, until the protagonist's or hero's task is com
pleted, at which time Goodman Brown seemingly frees himself from the
clutches of evil.
Tzvetan Todorov and Gerard Genette
Another narratologist, the Franco-Bulgarian theorist and philosopher

Tzvetan Todorov (1939-), declares that all stories are composed of gram
matical units. For Todorov, the syntax of narrativehow the various gram
matical elements of a story combine is essential. By applying a rather
intricate grammatical model to narrativedividing the text into semantic,
syntactic, and verbal aspectsTodorov believes he can discover the narra-
hve's langue and establish a grammar of narrative. He begins by asserting
104 Chapter 5 Modemity/Postmodernism
that the grammatical clause, and in turn, the subject and verb
interpretive unit of each sentence and can be linguistically an^ the^si
further dissected into a variety of grammatical categories to sh a4
narratives are structured. An individual text (parole) interests TodI^0VvaU
require a reader's special attention. (Jenette's live-part work Figures /-y

(a series written from 1967 to 2002) and particularly his text Narrative
D iscourse: An Essay in M ethod (1979) has strongly influenced structuralism's
vocabulary and methodology in both America and France.
Although these narratologists provide us with various approaches to
texts, all furnish us with a metalanguagewords used to describe language
so we can understand how a text means, not what it means.
Jo n ath an C uller
By the m id-1970s, Jonathan Culler (1944-), professor of English and compar

ative literature at Cornell University, becam e the voice of structuralism in
A m erica and took structu ralism in yet another direction. In his work
Structuralist Poetic: Structuralism, Linguistics, and the Study o f Literature (1975),
C uller declares that abstract linguistic models used by narratologists tend to
focu s on parole, spend ing too m uch tim e analyzing individual stones,
poem s, and novels. W hat is needed, he believes, is a return to an investiga
tion of langue, Saussure's main premise.
According to Culler, readers, when given a chance, som ehow will make
sense out of the most bizarre texts because readers possess w hat Culler calls
literary com petence. Through experiences with texts, Culler asserts, readers
have internalized a set of rules that govern their acts o f interpretation-
Instead of analyzing individual interpretations of a work, we must spen
ou r time, Culler insists, on analyzing the act of interpretation itself. We mus
shift the focus from the text to the reader. How, asks Culler, does interpreta
tion take place in the first place? What system underlies the very act of rea
ing that allows anv other svstem to ooerate?
aska, is jn- 4
Pret a Work? In competence rea d ers u se to inter-
'? W hat system g u id es them
* W-U ^ I.
making ^
sense of the spoken
-
xr- w o rd :
mmr-
pter5 Modernity/ P o stm o d ern ism 105

C u lle r m a in ta in s th a t e v e r y r e a d e r h o ld s
to th r e e u n d e r ly in g a s s u m p *
tio n s w h e n r e a d i n g a n d i n t e r p r e t i n g t e x t s :
1 A text w ill b e u n ifie d .

2 A text w ill b e th e m a tic a lly s ig n ific a n t.
3 . A te x t's s ig n ific a n c e c a n ta k e th e fo rm o f re flectio n .
Accordingly, Culler then seeks to establish the system, the langue, that un-
dergirds the reading process. By focusing on the act of interpretation itself to
discover literature s langue, Culler believes he is returning structuralism to
its Saussurean roots.
A Model of Interpretation
A lt h o u g h s t r u c t u r a l i s t t h e o r i e s a b o u n d , a c o r e o f s t r u c t u r a l i s t s b e l i e v e s t h a t
th e p r im a r y s i g n i f y i n g s y s t e m i s b e s t f o u n d a s a s e r i e s o f b i n a r y o p p o s i t i o n s
th a t th e r e a d e r o r g a n i z e s , v a l u e s , a n d u s e s t o i n t e r p r e t t h e t e x t . E a c h b i n a r y
o p e r a t io n c a n b e p i c t u r e d a s a f r a c t i o n , t h e t o p h a l f ( t h e n u m e r a t o r ) b e i n g
w h a t is m o r e v a l u e d th a n its r e la te d b o tto m h a lf (th e d e n o m in a to r ).
A c c o r d in g ly , i n t h e b i n a r y o p e r a t i o n l i g h t / d a r k , t h e r e a d e r h a s l e a r n e d t o
v a lu e l i g h t o v e r d a r k , a n d i n t h e b i n a r y o p e r a t i o n g o o d / e v i l , t h e r e a d e r h a s
s im ila r ly l e a r n e d t o v a l u e g o o d o v e r e v i l . H o w t h e r e a d e r m a p s o u t a n d o r
g a n iz e s t h e v a r i o u s b i n a r y o p e r a t i o n s a n d t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s f o u n d
w ith in t h e t e x t b u t a l r e a d y e x i s t i n g i n t h e m i n d o f t h e r e a d e r d e t e r m i n e s f o r
th a t p a r t i c u l a r r e a d e r t h e t e x t 's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
No matter what its methodology, structuralism emphasizes form and
structure, not the actual content of a text. Although individual texts must be
analyzed, structuralists are more interested in the rule-governed system that
underlies texts rather than the texts themselves. How texts meannot what
texts meanis their chief interest.
FROM STRUCTU RA LISM TO POSTSTRUCTURALISM :

DECONSTRUCTION
Throughout much of the 1950s and 1960s, structuralism dominated

European and American literary theory and criticism. While the application
structuralist principles varies from one theoretician to another, all believe
that language is the primary means of signification (i.e., how we achieve
leaning through linguistic signs and other symbols) and that language
comprises its own rule-governed system to achieve such meaning. Although
lan8uage is the primary sign system, it is not the only one. Fashions, sports,
106 Chapter 5 Modemi.y/PostmodemUm
have their own language or codes wherebv
dining, and other activities all na pected of them m a particular sitUa,
the participants know what is o for example, connoisseurs of
tion. When dining at an elegant res a from the finger bowl. Similar^
dining know that it is inappropn t it is indeed both appropriate and CUc!
football fans know that during a g DOrt their team,
tomary for them to shout and scream expectations highlight that an
From a structuralist perspective such e x p e ^ ^ ^ ^ t h a t a
d teco v eT tt^ 'm te stmcturalbts declare that the proper study of reality and
discover tnese nuts, mi uc individual practices, not the ind vidual
meaning is the system behind such indiviaua F viaual
practices themselves. Like attending a football g a m eo g at a f,ne res_
taurant, the act of reading is also a cultural and a social p e that contains
its own codes. Meaning in a text resides in these codes that the reader has
mastered before he or she even picks up an actual text. For the structuralist,
the proper study of literature is an inquiry into the conditions surrounding
the act of interpretation itself, not an investigation of an individual text.
In the mid-1960s, this structuralist assumption that meaning can be dis
covered through an examination of a text s structural codes was challenged
by the maxim of undecidability: a text has many meanings and, therefore,
no definitive interpretation. Rather than providing answers about the mean
ing of texts or a methodology for discovering how a text means, a new ap
proach to reading, deconstruction theory, asks a different set of questions,
endeavoring to show that what a text claims it says and what it actually says
are discemibly different. By casting doubt on most previously held theories,
deconstruction declares that a text has an almost infinite number of possible
interpretations. Furthermore, declare some deconstructionists, the interpre
tations themselves are just as creative and may be as important as the text or
texts being interpreted.
With the advent of deconstruction and its challenge to structuralism and
other established theories, a paradigmatic shift occurs in literary theory and
criticism. Before deconstruction, literary criticsNew Critics, some reader-
oriented theorists, structuralists, and othersfound meaning within the liter
ary text or the codes of the various sign systems within the world of the text
and the reader The most innovative of these theorists, the structuralists, pro
vided new and exciting ways of discovering meaning, but nonetheless, these
theorists maintained that meaning could be found. Underlying all the prede-
^ 3 T nS ^ W rld is a ^ philosophical, ethical,
beliefs held by Western'culture f o r \ b o u X 'y h * Provided lhe basf for
gence of deconstruction, these lone* h hundred Years- Wlth theemf
poststructuralism, a new basis for n n / ^ d bellefs were challenged by
name denoting that it historicallv erstanding and guiding humanity (its
historians, anthropologists l i t e r s 3fter r Vost structuralism). Often'
postmodernism synonymouslv e nsts' and other scholars use the tern1
y ymously with deconstruction and poststructuralistn,
torn* .................. *vum m 11to
rory theory than do the terms
invtstructuralism or Reconstruction.
DECONSTRUCTION: IT S HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
Deconstruction: Its Beginnings
The term deconstruction first emerged on the American literary stage in 1966
when Jacques Derrida (1930-2004), a French philosopher and teacher, read
his paper Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences"
at a Johns Hopkins University symposium. (Derrida both borrows and
amends the meaning of this word from a work titled Basic Problems o f
Phenomenology (1927), written by the German philosopher Martin
Heidegger.) In "Structure, Sign, and Play," (what many scholars believe to be
the inaugural essay for deconstruction theory) Derrida questions and dis
putes the metaphysical assumptions held to be true by Western philosophy
since the time of Plato, and inaugurates what many critics believe to be the
most intricate and challenging method of textual analysis yet to appear.
Derrida himself would not want deconstruction construed as a critical
theory, a school of criticism, a mode or method of literary criticism, or a phi
losophy. Nowhere in Derrida's writings does he state the encompassing
tenets of his critical approach, nor does he ever present a codified body of
deconstructive theory or a practical methodology. Although he develops his
views and ideas throughout his canon, Derrida believes that he cannot de
velop a formalized statement of his "rules for reading, interpretation, and
writing." Unlike a unified treatise, Derrida claims that his approach to read
ing and literary analysis is more a "strategic device" than a methodology,
more a strategy or approach to literature than a school or theory of criticism.
Such theories of criticism, he believes, must identify with a body of knowl
edge that adherents decree to be true or to contain truth. It is this assertion
that truth or a core of metaphysical ideals actually exists and can be believed,
articulated, and supported that Derrida wishes to dispute and "decon
struct." His device is deconstruction, a term Derrida defines as "a position
one has with regard to something."
Because deconstruction uses previously formulated theories from other
schools of criticism, coins many words for its newly established ideas, and
challenges beliefs long held in Western culture, many students, teachers, and
critics avoid studying its ideas, fearing the supposed complexity of its ana
lytic apparatus. By organizing deconstruction and its assumptions into three
workable areas of study rather than plunging directly into some of its com
plex terminology, we can begin to grasp this approach to textual analysis.
lK.tf rvrridn borrows and then am,.
Hirst, we will briefly ex'" '" 'winl' f()r his deconstructive strategy. n?ds
from structuralism, the startu b P , h nges Derrida makes in W<*!?Xt
we will investigate the rad icaU
philosophy and metaphysics, >c master the new termin'?
Western metaphysics on its | a!su m ptions and their correspo"0
ogv, coupled with the ^ P ^ ^ ^ nn analysis, of deconstruction 0 d n
ing methodological approac es to tex>u text
derstand and use this approach to interpret g
Derrida's Starting Place: Structuralism
Derrida begins formulating his strategy of reading by critiquing Ferdinand

de Saussure's Course in General Linguistics. Derrida accepts Saussure's pri-
mary belief that language is a system of rules and that these rules govern
every aspect of language. In addition, Derrida affirms Saussure s assump
tion that the linguistic sign (Saussure's linguistic replacement for the word
word) is both arbitrary and conventional. For example, most languages have
different words for the same concept. The English word man, for instance, is
homme in French. And in English we know that the meaning of the word pit
exists not because it possesses some innate acoustic quality, but because it
differs from hit, wit, and lit. In other words, the linguistic sign is composed of
two parts: the signifier, the spoken or written constituent such as the sound
/ t / and the orthographic (written) symbol t, and the signified, the concept
signaled by the signifier. It is this relationship between the signifier (e.g., the
word dog) and the signified (the concept or the reality behind the word dog)
that Saussure maintains is arbitrary and conventional. The linguistic sign is
thus defined by differences that distinguish it from other signs, not by any
innate properties.
Believing that our knowledge of the world is shaped by the language
that represents it, Saussure is insistent about the arbitrary relationship he-
tween the signifier and the signified. In establishing this principle, he under-
mines the long-held belief that there is some natural link between the word
and the thing it represents-that is, the word's referent. Saussure asserts
r b ti'n n s h in er ? Sl8nifier and the signified are linked that some kind of
h o n h i n L T f ' t gctr n 'hese two linguistic elements, although the reb-
Saussure meaninoîn ^ and conventionalized. Ultimately, W
sounds that rely chirpy'on the ditU'' f ' 9 * 3 system atized combination^
nate properties within th< Lrencs among these signs, not on any
in4 u U d : ^ ^ r ^ r ves-u * that mer $
Derrida borrows from S an e/ 1Terences among the language signs
deconstruction. Ure as a ^ building block in the formula410
Ch P * r 5 .M d nl,y/1,M|m(idi.m.sm 10#
perrida's Interpretation of Sausnure's Sign
P e r r i d e a n d e c o n s t r u c t i o n b e g i n s w i t h a n d e m o h it i, , i i
d ecree th a t la n g u a g e is a s y s te m b a s e d o n d i f f e r ,.,,. n T S S a u s s u r c '8
t u s s o r e th a t w e c a n k n o w th e m e a n in g T " l
th e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s a m o n g t h e m s e l v , ^ U n lik T " '* ' "
I X r r id a a l s o a p p . i e s t h i s r e a s o n i n g t o t h e s i X ^ ^ S :
n i fie d c a n a l s o b e k n o w n o n l y t h r o u g h i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d it s d i f f e r e n c e ,
a m o n g o th e r s ,g n ,b e d s . F u r t h e r m o r e , d e c la r e s D e r r id a th e s ig n ifie d c a n n o t
o r ie n t o r m a k e p e r m a n e n t t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e s i g n i f i e s f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
b e tw e e n th e s i g n ,h e r a n d th e s ig n if ie d is b o th a r b itr a r y a n d c o n v e n tio n a l.
A c c o r d i n g l y , s i g n i f i e d s o f t e n f u n c t i o n a s s i g n i f i e r s . F o r e x a m p l e , in t h e s e n -
te n c e I fille d the glass w ith m ilk, th e s p o k e n o r w r itte n w o rd glass is a s i g n i f i e r ;
container t h a t
its s i g n i f i e d i s t h e c o n c e p t o f a c a n b e f i l l e d . H o w e v e r , in t h e
s e n te n c e The container was fille d w ith glass, th e s p o k e n o r w r itte n w o rd
container, a s i g n i f i e d in t h e p r e v i o u s s e n t e n c e , is n o w a s ig n ifie r , its s ig n if ie d
b e in g t h e c o n c e p t o f a n o b j e c t t h a t c a n b e f i l l e d .
ASSUMPTIONS OF DECONSTRUCTION
Transcendental Signified
Believing that signification is both arbitrary and conventional, Derrida now
begins his process of turning Western philosophy on its head. He boldly as
serts that the entire history of Western metaphysics from Plato to the present
is founded on a classic, fundamental error. This great error is Western phi
losophy's searching for what Derrida calls a transcendental signified, an ex
ternal point of reference upon which one may build a concept or philosophy.
Once found, this transcendental signified would provide ultimate meaning
since it would be the origin of origins, reflecting itself and, as Derrida says,
providing a "reassuring end to the reference from sign to sign. It would, in
essence, guarantee to those who believe in it that they do exist and have
meaning. For example, if we posit that / or self is a transcendental signified,
then the concept of s e lf becomes the unifying principle upon which I struc
ture my world. Objects, concepts, ideas, or even people take on meaning in
my world only if I filter them through my unifying, ultimate sigm iee: s c f
Unlike other signifieds, the transcendental sigm 10 wou ^ other
understood without com paring it to other signi ilk s or slgni .
words, its meaning would originate directly with itself, not d 'J^ c n tn ^ y ^
Nationally as does the meaning of all other sigm h s or ^ f meaning
transcendental signified functions as or provides the center of meaning,
Chapters Modernity/Postmodernism
110
AI V V. j- -
allowing those who believe in one or more of them to structure their m

I d such centers of truth. By definition, a center of m e a n e r *
not subject itself to structural analysis because by so doing v v o u ld ^ d
place as a transcendental signified to * 1d >
the concept selfto be my transcendental signified, then learn that my
self is composed of the id, the ego, and the superego, I could no l o n g ^
the self or I to be my transcendental signified. In the pr cess of discovering
three parts of my conscious and unconscious mind, 1 have both s t r u c t ^
analyzed and "decentered" self, thus negating it as a transcendental s i g ^
Logocentrism
According to Derrida, Western metaphysics has invented a variety of term

that can function as centers: God, reason, origin, being, essence, truth, humoû.
the basis for all our thoughts and actions

Derrida readily admits that we can never totally free ourselves from our
logocentric habit of thinking and our inherited concept of the universe. To
decenter any transcendental signified is to be caught up automatically in the
terminology that allows that centering concept to operate. For example, if
the concept self functions as my center and 1 then discover my unconscious
self, I automatically place in motion what Derrida calls a binary opposi
tion" (two opposing concepts): the self and the unconscious self. By decenter
ing and questioning the self, I cause the unconscious self to become the new
center. By questioning the old center, I establish a new one.
Such logocentric thinking, declares Derrida, has its origin in Aristotle's
principle of noncontradiction: A thing cannot both have a property and not
have a property. Thanks to Aristotle, maintains Derrida, Western meta
physics has developed an "either-or" mentality or logic that inevitably leads
to dualistic thinking and to the centering and decentering of transcendental
signifieds. The process of logocentric thinking, asserts Derrida, is natural but
problematic for Western readers.
Binary Oppositions
other is decentered, Derrida mn *1 ^ un*ty automatically means that an-

a system of binary operations UC^ that Western metaphysics is based on
oppositions). For each center at/ ConcePtual oppositions (also called binary
' an PPosing center (e.g., God/hum ankind, for
Chapter 5 Modern!
Tn ity / Postmodernism 111
^ rr id a objects to the
ertMnu*. -...... ----------- wtuunca us me oasis tor Weste
estern metaphysics.
phonocentrism
Derrida believes that establishing such conceptually based binary opposi

tions as the basis for believing what is really real (one's worldview) is prob
lematic at best. Instead, he wishes to dismantle or deconstruct the structure
such binary oppositions have created. Derrida asserts that the binary oppo
sitions on which Western metaphysics has been constructed since the time of
Plato are structured so one element will always be privileged (be in a supe
rior position) and the other unprivileged (in an inferior position). In this
way of thinking, the first or top elements of the pairs in the following list of
binary oppositions are privileged: man/woman, human/animal, soul/body,
good/bad. Key for Derrida is his assertion that Western thought has long
privileged speech over writing. This privileging of speech over writing
Derrida calls phonocentrism .
In placing speech in the privileged position, phonocentrism treats writ
ing as inferior. We value, says Derrida, a speaker's words more than the
speaker's writing because words imply presence. Through the vehicle of
spoken words, we supposedly learn directly what a speaker is trying to say.
From this point of view, writing becomes a mere copy of speech, an attempt
to capture the idea that was once spoken. Whereas speech implies presence,
writing signifies absence, thereby placing into action another binary opposi
tion: presence/absence.
Since phonocentrism is based on the assumption that speech conveys
the meaning or direct ideas of a speaker better than writing (a mere copy of
speech), phonocentrism assumes a logocentric way of thinking, that the self
is the center of m eaning and can best ascertain ideas directly from other
selves through spoken words. Through speaking, the self declares its pres
ence, its significance, and its being or existence.
M etaphysics o f P re se n ce
G u p te rS Modernity /Postmodernism
112
fromie foundations upon which such beliefs have been establish

wnstructine the basic pa-mi** of metaphys.cs of presence, Derri(J H
Z he gives us a strategy for reading that opens up a variety
pn-tations heretofore unseen by those who are bound by ,he
Western thought. nts of
METHODOLOGY
Acknowledging Binary Operations in Western Thought
The first stage in a deconstructive reading is to recognize the existent

the operation of binary oppositions in our thinking. According to Do ^
\ . ... , .,. j __:__ i c ___ d u i __ ? êrnda/
one of the most "violent hierarchies" derived from Platonic and Aristot 1
thought is speech/writing, with speech being privileged. Consequentan
speech is awarded presence, and writing is equated with absence. Beca ^
writing is the inferior of the two, writing becomes simply the symbols
speech, a secondhand representation of ideas.
Once any of these hierarchies is recognized and acknowledged, Derrid
proposes that we can readily reverse its elements. Such a reversal is possible
because truth is ever elusive; we can always decenter the center if any is
found. By reversing the hierarchy, Derrida does not wish merely to substi
tute one hierarchy for another and involve himself in a negative mode
When the hierarchy is reversed, says Derrida, we will then be able to exam
ine those values and beliefs that give rise to both the original hierarchy and
the newly created one. When Derrida examines each value or belief in the hi
erarchy, he is putting these elements under a process he calls erasurehe is
assuming, for the moment, that each of the signifiers is clear and definitive.
He does realize that he is involving himself in a reading strategy because
each value or belief is, according to Derrida, absent of any definitive mean-
ing. Such an examination will reveal how the meaning of terms arises from
the differences between them.
Arche-writing
In Of Grammatology (1967), Derrida spends much time explaining why th1

speech/writing hierarchy can and must be reversed. Grammatology
Derrida s term for the science of writing and his investigation of the orig^
language itself. In short, he argues for a redefinition of the term writing
will allow him to assert that writing is actually a precondition for and p
to speech. According to Derrida's metaphysical reasoning, language t e
comes a special kind of writing that he calls arche-writing or a r c h il
Chapter 5 Modernity/Postmodernism 113
Using; traditional Western m etaphysics that is grounded in phonocen-

Derrida begins his reversal of the speech/writing hierarchy by noting
that both language and writing share common characteristics. Both, for ex
ample involve an encoding or inscription. In writing, this coding is obvious
because the w ritten sym bols represent various phonemes. In language or
speech, a similar encoding exists. As Saussure has already shown, there ex
ists an arbitrary relationship betw een the signifier and the signified (be
tween the spoken word cat, for example, and the concept of cat itself). There
is, then, no innate relationship between the spoken word and the concept,
object, or idea it represents. Nevertheless, once a signifier and a signified join
to form a sign, some kind of relationship then exists between these compo
nents of the sign. Accordingly, some kind of inscription or encoding has
taken place between the spoken word cat (the signifier) and its concept (the
signified).
For Derrida, both writing and language are means of signification, and
each can be considered a signifying system. Traditional Western metaphysics
and Saussurean linguistics equate speech (language) with presence because
speech is accompanied by the presence of a living speaker. The presence of a
speaker necessarily links sound and sense and leads to understanding one
usually comprehends rather well the spoken word. Writing, on the other
hand, assumes the absence of a speaker. Such absence can produce misun
derstanding because writing is a depersonalized medium that separates the
actual utterance of the speaker and his or her audience. This absence can
lead to misunderstanding of the signifying system.
All the more reason, Derrida asserts, that we broaden our understanding
of writing. Writing, he declares, cannot be reduced to letters or other sym
bols inscribed on a page. Rather, it is directly related to what Saussure be
lieved to be the basic elem ent of language: difference. We know one
phoneme or one word because each is different from another, and we know
that there is no innate relationship between a signifier and its signified. The
phoneme /b/, for example, could have easily become the symbol for the
phoneme /d/, just as the coined word bodt could have become the English
word ball. It is this freeplay or undecidability in any system of communica
tion that Derrida calls writing. The quality of play with the various elements
of signification in any system of communication totally eludes a speaker s
awareness when using language, for the speaker falsely assumes a position
of supposed master of his or her speech.
By equating writing with freeplay or the element of undecidability at the
center of all systems of communication, Derrida declares that writing actu-
ajly governs language, thereby negating the speech/writing hierarchy of
Western metaphysics. Writing now becomes privileged and speech unprivi
leged because speech is a kind of writing called arche-writing.
Derrida then challenges W estern philosophy's concept that hum an
consciousness gives birth to language. Without language (or arche-writing),
Charter 5 Modernity/lostmodernUm
argues Derrida, there can be no consciouv^ ---------- ^v,3clo.

supposes language. Through arche-writing, we impose human c Pre-
------ - w o r ld .
V binary hierarchy is always unstable and pr(^

The relationship between any b m a r y to reverse ail bmary opposition
Wmahc. It is not Derrida s P ^ Prrida wants to show the fragile basis
thTt exist in Western thought- Ra * h ^ and [he possrbtlity of inverting these
t the establishment of sudt hmra e and Ufe. Derrida uses the ten,,
hierarchies to gain new ms ghte " ^ nship between elements m a bma,,
supplement to refer to the n^ ' 6 h/wri,ig opposrhon, w rthng supple,
operation. For example, in the P ^ ,ace of speech (arche-writing).
ments speech and in actuahty in all binary opposthons. In the
Supplementation, Derrida as:>e , Westem thought would assert the
truth/deception hierarchy, tor aUr'ibuting to deception a mere supple-
supremacy of truth over decep . tWnking asserts the purity of truth over
mentary role. The logocentncj^ > more frequently than not contains
deception. Upon examination, F^ Derrida, when truth has been spo-
at least some truth, and who is Y' q{ tmth may simply not exist. In all
" ^ ^ Z u d e s , 4 ^ ion operates.
Differance
By recognizing that supplementation necessarily occurs in all of Westem

DerrWayb e S a" t ^ " T ^ u 8 'he privileged and unprivileged elements,
m etauhvsS T readin8 strategy. Once he "turns Westem
Westem element! h e3 . e asserts hts answer to logocentrism and other
itself is derived I'omtteFKn&Zorddr'*diff* rance-The word
or delav" anH au . , , wo d dlf ferer>meaning "to defer, postpone,
word to be ambieun ' M lkK n { from " Derrida deliberately cote his
French the wordfs a S ' lng on ôlh meanings simultaneously. And in
n o w a y to he d Z e
Z, T eXiS,S ' " " In speech the, is
Derrida's coined word 'dijffrance.ê*ween French w lrd and
leys to understrndTng 3 decoTsdtmcteanS r V diffl!rance is one of the Z ,

"What if?" question W W (COnstruct,on- Basically, differance is Derrida s
is no presence in whom we n ^ an^cendental signified exists? What if
edge does not arise from J i r a f!d ultimate truth? What if all our kno*1'
inherently unifying elemenf *1 f nt^ ^ What if there is no essence, being/0
y g element in the universe? What then?
Chapter 5 Modernity/Postmodernism 115
The presence of such a transcendental signified would immediately es

tablish the binary operation presence/absence. Since Western metaphysics
holds that presence is supreme or privileged and absence unprivileged,
Derrida suggests that we temporarily reverse this hierarchy, making it now
absence/presence. With such a reversal, we can no longer posit a transcen
dental signified. No longer is there an absolute standard or coherent unity
from which knowledge proceeds and develops. All human knowledge and
all self-identity must now spring from difference, not sameness, from ab
sence, not presence.
When a reversal of this pivotal binary operation occurs, two dramatic re
sults follow: First, human knowledge becomes referential; that is, we can
know something only because it differs from some other bit of knowledge,
not because we can compare this knowledge to any absolute or coherent
unity (a transcendental signified). Human knowledge must now be based on
difference. We know something because it differs from something else to
which it is related. By the reversal, nothing can be studied or learned in iso
lation because all knowledge becomes context related. Second, we must also
forgo closure that is, since no transcendental signified exists, all interpreta
tions concerning life, self-identity, and knowledge are possible, probable,
and legitimate.
But what is the significance of differance when reading texts? If we, like
Derrida, assert that differance operates in language and also in writing
(Derrida sometimes equates differance and arche-writing), what are the im
plications for textual analysis? The most obvious answer is that texts lack
presence. As soon as we do away with the transcendental signified and re
verse the presence/absence binary operation, texts can no longer have pres
ence. In isolation, texts cannot possess meaning. Because all meaning and
knowledge is now based on difference, no text can simply mean one thing.
Texts become intertextual. The meaning of a text cannot be ascertained by
examining only that particular text; instead, a text's meaning evolves from
that derived from the interrelatedness of one text to an interrelatedness of
many texts. Like language itself, texts are caught in a dynamic, context-
related interchange. Never can we state a text's definitive meaning because it
has no "one" correct or definitive interpretation. No longer can we declare
one interpretation to be right and another wrong because meaning in a text
is always illusive, dynamic, and transitory.
The search, then, for the text's "correct" meaning or the author's so-
called intentions becomes meaningless. Since meaning is derived from dif
ferences in a dynamic, context-related, ongoing process, all texts have multiple
leanings or interpretations. If we assert, as does Derrida, that no tianscen-
dental signified exists, then there can exist no absolute or pure meaning
conveyed supposedly by authorial intent or professorial dictates. Meaning
evolves as we, the readers, interact with the text, with both the readers and
Ihe text providing social and cultural context.
114 ChaP5.Modemi.y/Pos.modemism
deconstructive suppositions
FOR TEXTUAL ANALYSIS
multiple interpretations and that a text Critical stance th

reinterpreted countless fnd has one and only one c o t ' *'
m T p t t o t d t o t C l m n S s assert that the great joy of textual analyst
S i n discovering new interpretations each ..m e a t ex, ts read and
reread. Ultimately, a text's meaning is undecidable beca se each reading 0r
rereading elicits different interp retation s.
When beeinning the interpretive process, deconstructionists seek to
override their own logocentric and inherited ways of viewing a text. Such
revolutionary thinking decrees that they find the binary oppositions at
work in the text itself. These binary oppositions, they believe, represent
established and accepted ideologies that more frequently than not posit
the existence of transcendental signifieds. These binary operations, then,
restrict meaning because they already assume a fixed interpretation of
reality. They assume, for instance, the existence of truth and falsehood,
reason and insanity, good and bad. Realizing that these hierarchies pre
suppose a fixed and a biased way of viewing the world, deconstruction
ists search for the binary oppositions operating in the text and reverse
them. By reversing these hierarchies, deconstructionists wish to challenge
the fixed views assumed by such hierarchies and the values associated
with such rigid beliefs.
The technique of identifying the binary operations that exist in a text
allows deconstructionists to expose the preconceived assumptions upon
which most of us base our interpretations. We all, for exam ple, declare
some activity, being, or object to be good or bad, valuable or worthless, sig
nificant or insignificant. These kinds of values or ideas automatically oper-
ate when we write or read any text. In the reversal of hierarchies that form
the basis of our interpretations, deconstructionists wish to free us from the
us to see aS tevMr pre'udiced beliefs- Such freedom, they hope, will allow
recognizedteXt eXC1" ng " eW persPectives that we have never before
read er 7 " ' be si b eously Perceived by the

Goodman Brown," for e x a m o ^ ^ In N athaniel H aw thorne's "Young
character
cnaracter who shepherds manYA readers believe
oeueve that the hfifty-year-o
tty -y ^ -
forest is Satan and, therefore n m3n ri Wn t r o u g h his night's visit in
terpretation of this character ecessai% an evil character. Brown's own 10
constructionist ideas, at I n J T * ^ 1suP P rt this view. According to <*
good/evil and God/Satan. But what perations are at WOfk? ên
f we reverse these hierarchies-
Chapter 5 M()di*rnity/|( t,mJ,. rrmm 117
rt- sevtralI f iB U W may not he Satan and may nnt be evil! Such a new p e r -
speetive will dramatically change our interpretation of the text P
LVconstruct.omsts nay that we cannot simultaneously see both of these
p e r s p e c t iv esintht story. To discover where the new hierarchy Satan/God or
evil/good will lead os in our interpretation, we must suspend our first inter
p o l a t i o n . We do not, however, forget it because it is locked in our minds. We
simplv Shift our allegiance to another perspective.
T h e p r o c e s s o f o s c illa t in g b e tw e e n in te r p r e ta tio n s , le v e ls , o r p e r s p e c -
tiv e s a l l o w s u s t o s e e t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f e v e r c h o o s i n g a c o r r e c t i n t e r p r e
t a t io n b e c a u s e f r o m D e r r i d a s p e r s p e c t i v e , m e a n in g is a n o n g o in g a c t iv i t y
th a t is a l w a y s i n p r o g r e s s , a l w a y s b a s e d o n diffcrance. B y a s k in g w h a t w ill
h a p p en if w e r e v e r s e th e h ie r a r c h ie s th a t fr a m e o u r p r e c o n c e iv e d w a y s o f
th in k in g , w e o p e n o u r s e lv e s to a n e v e r - e n d in g p r o c e s s o f in t e r p r e t a t io n ,
o n e th a t d e c r e e s t h a t n o h ie r a r c h y o r b in a r y o p e r a t io n is r ig h t a n d n o o th e r
is w r o n g .
Deconstruction: A N ew Reading Strategy
D e c o n s tr u c tio n is ts d o n o t w a n t to s e t u p a n e w p h ilo s o p h y , a n e w lite r a r y

th e o ry o f a n a l y s i s , o r a n e w s c h o o l o f l i t e r a r y c r it ic is m . I n s t e a d , t h e y p r e s e n t
a n e w r e a d in g s tr a te g y , o n e th a t a llo w s u s to m a k e c h o ic e s c o n c e r n in g th e
v a r io u s l e v e ls o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w e s e e o p e r a t i n g in a te x t. A ll le v e ls , t h e y
m a i n t a in , h a v e v a l i d i t y . D e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t s a l s o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e i r a p p r o a c h
to r e a d i n g f r e e s t h e r e a d e r f r o m i d e o l o g i c a l a l l e g i a n c e s t h a t r e s t r i c t t h e c o m
p r e h e n s io n o f m e a n i n g in a te x t.
B e c a u s e m e a n in g , th e y b e lie v e , e m e r g e s th r o u g h in te r p r e ta tio n , e v e n th e
a u th o r d o e s n o t c o n t r o l a t e x t 's in t e r p r e t a t io n . A lt h o u g h w r it e r s m a y h a v e
c le a r ly s t a t e d i n t e n t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r t e x t s , s u c h s t a t e m e n t s s h o u l d b e
g iv e n l i t t l e c r e d e n c e . L i k e l a n g u a g e i t s e l f , t e x t s h a v e n o o u t s i d e r e f e r e n t s o r
tr a n s c e n d e n ta l s ig n if ie d s . W h a t a n a u t h o r t h in k s h e o r s h e s a y s o r m e a n s in
a te x t m a y b e q u i t e d i f f e r e n t f r o m w h a t is a c t u a l l y w r i t t e n . D e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t s ,
th e re fo re , lo o k f o r p l a c e s in th e t e x t w h e r e th e a u t h o r m i s s p e a k s o r lo s e s
c o n tro l o f l a n g u a g e a n d s a y s w h a t w a s s u p p o s e d l y n o t m e a n t to b e s a id .
T h ese s lip s o f l a n g u a g e o f t e n o c c u r in q u e s t io n s , f ig u r a t iv e la n g u a g e , a n d
stro n g d e c l a r a t i o n s . F o r e x a m p l e , s u p p o s e w e r e a d t h e f o l l o w i n g w o r d s .
Im p o rta n t S e n io r s M e e t in g ." A lth o u g h th e a u th o r th in k s th a t r e a d e r s
w ill i n t e r p r e t t h e s e w o r d s t o m e a n t h a t i t i s i m p o r t a n t t h a t a l l s e n i o r s b e
p resen t a t th is p a r t ic u la r m e e t in g , th e a u t h o r m a y h a v e m is s p o k e n , th e s e
w o rd s c a n a c t u a l l y m e a n t h a t o n l y i m p o r t a n t s e n i o r s s h o u ld a t t e n d th is
m e e tin g . B y e x a m i n i n g s u c h s l i p s a n d t h e b i n a r y o p e r a t i o n s t h a t g o v e r n
th e m , d e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t s a r e a b l e t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e u n d e c i d a b i l i t y o f a
te x t's m e a n i n g .
5 Modernity / 1ost modernism
118 Chapter
At fir
linearth
this is so,
. Dbwver the binary operations that govern a text.
. Comment on the values, concepts, and ideas beyond these operations.
Reverse these present binary operations.
Dismantle previously held worldviews.
Accept the possibility of various perspectives or levels of meaning in a text base(j
on the new binary inversions.
Allow meaning of the text to be undecidable.
Although all these elements do operate in a deconstructionist reading

they may not operate in this exact sequence. Since we all tend toward logo,
centrism when reading, we may not notice some logocentric binary opera-
tions functioning in the text until we have reversed some other obvious
binary oppositions and are interpreting the text on multiple levels. In addition
we must never declare such a reading to be completed or finished because
the process of meaning is ongoing, never allowing us to pledge allegiance to
any one view.
Such a reading strategy disturbs most readers and critics because it is not
a neat, completed package, whereby if we follow step A through to step 2 we
arrive at the reading of the text. Because texts have no external referents, their
meanings depend on the close interactions of the text, the reader, and social
and cultural elements both within the reader and the text, as does every
reading or interpretive process. Denying the organic unity of a text, decon
structionists declare the freeplay of language in a text. Since language itself is
reflexive, not mimetic, we can never stop finding meaning in any given text,
whether we have read such a text once or a hundred times.
Overall, deconstruction solicits an ongoing relationship between the in
terpreter (the critic) and the text. By examining the text alone, deconstruc
tionists hope to ask a set of questions that will continually challenge the
ideological positions of power and authority that dominate literary criticism.
Furthermore, in the process of discovering meaning in a text, deconstruc
tionists declare that criticism of a text is just as valuable as the text being
read, thereby inverting the text/criticism hierarchy.
American Deconstructionists
jj***-
tfi'wif.i..
the sometimes terse metaphv'sinl a " " '~oauysm Cultural Criu

(1921-) (Cr,7,v,,, i the W,W1r^ ,s; V t ' s , t l rU^,i,,nis' G e o f f r e y S ,,
strong voice of Barbara Johnson (1947 , n ? T o j J mgih
and the phenomenological critic-turned H (77'<' C"" ' D # w r " U n
(192^ h t ' h " " f Rf,pC""'on; S<*fcn m>/fer r St,rUC,i,mis,i HilhsMiller
sured that deconstruction would have a voire a 1982)' ^ critics as-
American literary theory. Although the 1 a,nd an established place in
ries such as Cultural Poetics and Postcolonhl her Poststctural theo-
heard and advocated, deconstruction's ph S " ' f * n0lV s,ron8'y being
Heal reading strategies form the basis ol m Ph' assumptions and prac-
of many postmodern literary pracHces.
questions for analysis
Structuralism
When examining any text through the lens of structuralism, ask yourself the
following questions:
W h a t a r e th e t e n s io n s , th e b in a r y o p p o s itio n s , h ig h lig h te d in th e te x t?
Is e a c h o f th e s e t e n s i o n s m i n o r o r m a jo r ?
W h a t d o y o u b e lie v e is th e m a jo r o r p iv o ta l te n s io n in th e w o r k ?
C a n y o u e x p la in th e in t e r t e x t u a lit y o f a ll th e d is c o v e r e d b in a r ie s ?
D o e s th is w o r k c o n t a i n a n y m y t h e m e s ? I f s o , w h a t a r e th ey , a n d h o w d o th e y
h e lp y o u d is c o v e r t h e t e x t 's s t r u c t u r e ?
The following questions apply your understanding of structuralism to

Nathaniel Hawthorne's short story "Young Goodman Brown":
W h a t a r e th e v a r i o u s b in a r y o p p o s itio n s o r o p e r a tio n s ? W h ic h o f th e s e b in a r ie s
c o n tro l th e s t o r y 's s t r u c t u r e ? W h a t is th e c h i e f b in a r y ?
W h a t m y t h e m e s a r e e v i d e n t in H a w t h o r n e 's t a le ? H o w d o t h e s e m y t h e m e s
sh o w th e i n t e r t e x t u a l i t y o f th is p a r t ic u la r te x t w ith o th e r lite r a r y te x ts y o u h a v e
re a d ?
H o w d o th e v a r io u s s e m a n t ic f e a tu r e s c o n t a in e d in " Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n "
d ire c tly r e la te to th e c o d e s , s ig n s , o r b in a r y o p p o s itio n s y o u fin d in th e te x t?
U sin g " Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n ," a p p ly a t le a s t th r e e d iffe r e n t m e th o d s o f s tru e -
fu ra lism to a r r iv e a t h o w th is p a r t ic u la r te x t a c h ie v e s m e a n in g . In th e fin a l a n a ly
sis, is th e r e a d if f e r e n c e a m o n g th e th r e e m e th o d o lo g ie s in h o w th e te x t a c h ie v e s
its m e a n in g ?
Choose another sign systemsports, music, classroom etiquette and explain
the codes that generate meaning.
5 Modernity/Postmodernism
1 20 C h a p te r
D e c o n s tr u c tio n
W h e n e x a m in in g a n y te x t th r o u g h th e le n s o f d e c o n s tr u c t io n ^
p r a c t ic e , ask yourself t h e fo llo w in g q u e s tio n s : t'ory a
W h at a re th e b in a ry o p e ra tio n s o r o p p o s itio n s th a t g o v e r n th e te x t
W h a t id e a s, c o n c e p ts , a n d v a lu e s a re b e in g e s ta b lis h e d b y th e s e h
k UJnarjfo
B y re v e rsin g th e e le m e n ts in e a c h o f th e b in a r ie s , c a n y o u c h a lle
o u sly h eld v a lu e sy ste m p o s ite d b y th e o r ig in a l b in a r y ? the pre^.
A fte r re v e rs in g o n e o r m o re b in a r ie s in a g iv e n te x t , c a n y o u d
o rig in a l in te rp re ta tio n o f th a t te x t? ar,tle y0(Jr
C an y o u cite th ree d iffe re n t in te r p r e ta tio n s f o r a t e x t o f y o u r ch o o
p in g a s e rie s o f th ree m a jo r b in a rie s c o n ta in e d in th a t te x t? Sln8 f],p
T h e fo llo w in g q u e s tio n s a p p ly y o u r u n d e r s t a n d in g o f d e c
t h e o r y to N a t h a n i e l H a w t h o r n e 's " Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n " - n s t ru cti0n
W rite a o n e-p a g e in te rp re ta tio n o f H a w th o r n e 's sto ry . A fte r y o u h a v e com I

y o u r in te rp re ta tio n , c ite th e b in a ry o p e r a tio n s th a t f u n c tio n b o th w ithin ^
ch o sen te x t an d w ith in y o u r th in k in g to a llo w y o u to a r r iv e a t y o u r perspectiv^
U sin g "Y o u n g G o o d m an B ro w n ," re v e rse o n e o f th e b in a ry o p era tio n s and re
p ret th e text. W h en y ou are fin ish ed , re v e rse tw o a d d itio n a l b in a rie s and reinte
the story. W h at differen ces exist b e tw e e n th e tw o in te rp re ta tio n s ? " 6
U s in g "Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n " a s y o u r t e x t , d e m o n s t r a te eith er how
H a w th o rn e m issp e a k s o r w h e re th e te x t in v o lv e s it s e lf in p a ra d o x , sometimes
ca lled aporia. B e sp ecific. B e a b le to p o in t to lin e s , fig u r a tiv e sp e ech , or imagi
n a tiv e la n g u a g e to su p p o rt y o u r s ta te m e n ts .
U sin g th e te x t o f "Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n ," c ite a t le a s t fo u r d ra m atica lly differ
e n t in terp reta tio n s, all b a se d o n d e c o n s tr u c tiv e re a d in g s .
CRITIQUES AND RESPONSES
Structuralism
United States and in Europ^Bormw603016/ dominant theory in both the

e aussure's linguistics, the texti 1?^ an b i d i n g elem ents of Ferdinand
psychoanalysis of both Sigmund F r ^ ,COncerns R u ssian Formalism, the
jea concerns of Michel Foucault th^/r 30(1 âcclues Lacan, the epistemolog-
L0U,S Althusser, and the multinlo !^ M arxist cn cern s o f the French theorist
seemingly embraced all discinlino 1 dle n a rratologists, structuralism
t i f i c ' ^ X ^ ^ ^ bUt aIso to life itself 3 Unifying a p p ro a ch not only
yses to texts and culture . ^ P P ly in8 its "o b jectiv e" and "scien
' U Prvided a new lens through which to
C hapters M odem ity/Postm odem ism 121
; .p" : ^ r s ^ ture and ** ^

m u s t b e f ir s t i n t e g r a t e d a n d t h e n a n a l y z e d b y e x a m i n i n g t h e ^ a l T s t m Z r e o f
w h ic h it is a p a r t - a s s e r t s t h a t a l l l i f e , i n c l u d i n g l i t e r a r y te x t s , i s c o n s t r u c t e d -
th a t is , b a s e d o n a s e r i e s o f i n t e r r e l a t e d s y s t e m s . It i s t h e s e s y s t e m s a n d t h e
stu d y o f t h e m - r a t h e r t h a n in d iv id u a l a c t io n s o r a n is o la te d t e x t - t h a t a r e
u lt im a t e ly i m p o r t a n t .
O v e r a ll, s t r u c t u r a lis m i s l e s s i m p o r t a n t t o d a y t h a n i t w a s in t h e 1 9 6 0 s .
O th e r t h e o r ie s t h a t t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t th e c u lt u r a l s ig n if ic a n c e o f b o th p e o p le
and te x ts h a v e o u t p a c e d s t r u c t u r a lis m fo r s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . F ir s t, s tr u c
tu r a lis m s g r e a t e s t s t r e n g t h its s t u d y o f th e s y s te m s o r c o d e s th a t s h a p e
m e a n in g is a ls o its g r e a t e s t w e a k n e s s . In h ig h lig h tin g th e v a r io u s s y s te m s
of m e a n in g , s t r u c t u r a li s m d e e m p h a s iz e s p e r s o n h o o d a n d in d iv id u a l te x ts.
C r itic s a r g u e t h a t s t r u c t u r a l i s m i s t h u s d e t e r m i n i s t i c ( f a v o r i n g s y s t e m s o v e r
e v e n ts o r a n i n d i v i d u a l ) a n d a h i s t o r i c a l . It d o e s n o t a c c o u n t f o r h u m a n i n d i
v id u a lity o r f o r a n y i n d e p e n d e n t a c t s , n o r d o e s it a d d r e s s th e d y n a m ic
a s p e c t s o f c u l t u r e s . I n d i v i d u a l t e x t s , a s s e r t s t r u c t u r a l i s m 's c r i t i c s , d o m a t t e r .
T h e c h a n g in g f a c e s o f c u lt u r e t h a t a r e s im u lt a n e o u s ly r e fle c t e d in is o la te d
te x ts a r e a l s o i m p o r t a n t . T e x t s , l i k e p e o p l e , a r e a t t i m e s i l l o g i c a l , b r e a k i n g
fro m t r a d i t i o n a n d s y s t e m s o f b e l i e f .
W it h t h e a d v e n t o f p o s t m o d e r n i s m a n d i t s e m p h a s e s o n t h e i n c r e d u l i t y o f
g ran d m e t a n a r r a t iv e s a n d th e s lip p e r y n a t u r e o f la n g u a g e , s t r u c t u r a lis m w ith
its lo g ic a l, o b j e c t i v e s t u d y o f s y s t e m s , s t r u c t u r e , a n d l a n g u a g e b e g a n t o l o s e
p o p u la r it y . A l t h o u g h s o m e s t r u c t u r a l i s t s p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e n a r r a t o l o g i s t s
c o n tin u e to c o n t r i b u t e t o l i t e r a r y t h e o r y a n d c r it ic is m , l i t e r a r y t h e o r ie s
g ro u n d e d in th e p h i lo s o p h y a n d m e t h o d o lo g y o f p o s tm o d e r n is m c u r r e n tly
r e c e iv e p r i m e a t t e n t i o n .
Deconstruction
M a k in g i t s a p p e a r a n c e o n t h e l i t e r a r y s t a g e i n t h e l a t t e r h a l f o f t h e 1 9 6 0 s , d e -
c o n s t r u c t io n t h e o r y e n t e r e d t h e a c a d e m y a t a t i m e w h e n q u e s t i o n i n g t e s t a
tu s q u o w a s b o t h a c a d e m i c a l l y a n d c u l t u r a l l y a c c e p t a b l e , b e c o m i n g a s s o m e
w o u ld a r g u e , t h e n o r m . T h e f i r s t w o r d o f D e r r i d a 's i n a u g u r a t i o n s p e e c h f o r
d e c o n s t r u c t i o n 's i n t r o d u c t i o n i n A m e r i c a " S t r u c t u r e , S i g n , a n d P l a y i n e
D is c o u r s e o f t h e H u m a n S c i e n c e s " p r e s e n t e d a t J o h n s H o p k i n s U n i v e r s i t y i n
1966 is perhaps, a w o r d t h a t s u c c e s s f u lly e n c a p s u la t e s th e b a s ic id e a u n d e r
ly in g d e c o n s t r u c t i o n t h e o r y . P e r h a p s , s a i d D e r r i d a , w e c a n n o t m a k e e i t h e r
P o s i t iv e o r n e g a t i v e d e f i n i t i v e s t a t e m e n t s . D i s a v o w i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a
t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s i g n i f i e d , d e c o n s t r u c t i o n q u e s t i o n s W e s t e r n h u m a n i >i s p r
c liv ity t o w a r d l o g o c e n t r i s m a n d i t s v a l u i n g o f o t h e r e l e m e n t s a n d d c *e n
a "n p a s s e d b y D e r r i d a 's c o n c e p t o f m e t a p h y s ic s o f p r e s e n c e d
*o a s k t h e w h a t - i f q u e s t i o n : W h a t i f n o t r a n s c e n d e n t a l s i g n i f i e d e x . s t s ? W h a t
S . M<xlemity/I^tmockrniSm
122 CK*Pw>r* lh? vVhat if, indeed, all is based Ud
ch entity as objective tnj e is arbitrary and difft.ren&
if there no s ? And what 1 *> and postmodernism be2a'
of h,ch h - a n i t y had ^
. Z o n i n g of the g r ^ " 'e,an* ^ now open to question The exact
q V Structured its existence. All texts have multiple mean-
S 5 > text '^ " i r l .^ and snppery. Indeed a.l writers
inss, and language .<* * dus they said, but almost what they were
speak, revealing not what th y b^ a form Gf play, with each partic-
afraid to say. And all meanings are often elusive,
ipant handling slippery texts w da,g phiiosophy and literary theory
Although some critics the> g which Western philosophy rests,
would destroy the very^fou ^ and stiU does provide an ener-
deconstruction theory did n not only by questioning all previous
getic and rigorous readi g ' . Qf reading itself. Some of its critics
readings but also by questioning postmodernism's seemingly
however, point ou, ^ 2 " h e validity of grand metanarrativ
T o ^ t inecn^ u lity toward such narratives), deconstruction is itself
SenHally establishing a metanarrative, one based on mcredul.ty and doubt.
In questioning the validity and existence of objectrve truth, it creates its own
yardstick by which its own concept of truth can be measured. In advocating
its antitheoretical position, it establishes one of its own and involves itself in
circular reasoning. And while advocating for intertextuality, it more fre
quently than not treats texts in isolation.
Overall, deconstruction's vocabulary and methodology have been ap
propriated by other disciplines and continue to elicit debate among literary
theorists and educators alike. Some of its adherents have brought decon
struction's analysis into politics and cultural events and concerns. Although
other schools of literary criticism have developed since the publication of
Derrida's inaugurating presentation "Structure, Sign, and Play" at Johns
Hopkins University, deconstruction theory remains a significant force as it
has become embedded in a variety of contemporary literary theories and
practices.
See Readings on Literary Criticism at the back of the text for the corner
stone essay on postmodernism, "Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse
of the Human Sciences," authored by its leading proponent, Jacques Derrida.
PSYCHOANALYTIC CRITICISM
Everywhere I go I find a poet has been there before me.
A t tr ib u t e d to S ig m u n d F re u d
INTRODUCTION
ur dreams fascinate, perplex, and often disturb us. Filled with bizarre
O twists of fate, wild exploits, and highly sexual images, our dreams can
bring us pleasure or terrorize us. Sometimes they cause us to question our
feelings, to contemplate our unspoken desires, and even to doubt the nature
of reality itself. Do dreams, we wonder, contain any degree of truth? Do they
serve any useful function?
The German organic chemist Friedrich August Kekule answers in the af
firmative. For years, Kekule investigated the molecular structure of benzene.
One night he dreamed that he saw a string of atoms shaped like a snake
swallowing its tale. Upon awakening, he drew this serpentine figure in his
notebook and realized it was the graphic structure of the benzene ring he
had been struggling to decipher. When reporting his findings at a scientific
meeting in 1890, he stated, "Let us learn to dream, gentlemen, and then we
may perhaps find the truth."
Giuseppe Tartini, an Italian violinist of the eighteenth century, similarly
discovered the value of dreams. One night he dreamed the devil came to his
bedside and offered to help him finish a rather difficult sonata in exchange
for his soul. Tartini agreed, whereupon the devil picked up Tartini s violin
and completed the unfinished work. On awakening, Tartini jotted down
horn memory what he had heard in his dream. Titled The Devil s Trill Sonata,
this piece is Tartini's best-known composition.
Like numerous scientists and composers, many writers have claimed
that they, too, have received some of their best ideas from their dreams.
123
124 Chapter 6 Psychoanalytic Criticism
r .w..mr>li maintained that many of hk ia

Kolvn I.ouis ^ ';vi'n^ m: t, jirw ilyVnim bin nightmares. Simj[ar] '^ o r
Dr.W (\ni A h * Jh/</ c ul. .h()st. of
Jckyll' titiii .. Others oowed
w e d m u c h o f H i , . ; . anW.
much of their Wrif nt*<
GotH'the, Hliike, Uuny. / . , , m8 Still others, such as I\x*, DeO,,-'^'
the
- - * 5
S 'That"our dreams"'and th o ^ o f others fascinate us cannot be den^

Whether it is their bizarre and often erotic content or their seemjn ,
prophetic powers, dreams cause us to question and exploret that par, * *>
minds over which we have ostensibly little control the unconscious.
Without question, the foremost investigator of the unconscious and it,
activities is the Viennese neurologist and psychologist Sigmund F,eud
Beginning with the publication of The Interpretation o f Dreams in 1900, F ^
lays the foundation for a model of how our minds operate. Hidden from tf*
workings of the conscious mind, the unconscious, he believes, plays a large
part in how we act, think, and feel. According to Freud, the best avenue for
discovering the content and the activity of the unconscious is through our
dreams. In the interaction of the conscious and unconscious, argues Freud,
we shape both ourselves and our world.
Developing both a body of theory and a practical methodology for his
science of the mind, Freud became the leading pioneer of psychoanalysis, a
method of treating emotional and psychological disorders. During psycho
analysis, Freud would have his patients talk freely in a patient-analyst set
ting about their early childhood experiences and dreams. When we apply
these same methods to our interpretations of works of literature, we engage
in psychoanalytic criticism.
Unlike some other schools of criticism, psychoanalytic criticism can
exist side by side with any other critical method of interpretation. Because
this approach attempts to explain the hows and whys of human actions
without developing an aesthetic theorya systematic, philosophical body
of beliefs about how meaning occurs in literature and other art forms-
Marxists, feminists, and New Historicists, for example, use psychoanalytic
methods in their interpretations without violating their own hermeneutics.
t SyC ?ana yt* Cntr m may *ên best be called an approach to literary &
terpretat;<)n ther than a particular school of criticism.
analvsis n JT h ls uncluestionably the founder of this approach tol'^r
riea and conr<rn A, J' pninaieu oui j

Jung's ideas, Northrop Frye-auth anaf,ytical Psychology. Using
literary criticism in the 1950 ! one of the nu)st influential
(1957)developed symbol! . S A,ltltoni}/ of Criticism: Fu'
helped change the directi r arbetypal criticism in the mid-19 ,e
h direction of twentieth-century literary analyst * *
Chapter 6 Psychoanalytic Criticism
125
iOAils t h e F r e n c h N e o - F r e u d i a n p s v e h o a n iK ,u f i
e x p a n d e d F r e u d 's t h e o r i e s in l i g h t o f n e w l y 'd e v e l o p e d i f n e u T
p r i n c i p l e th e r e b y r e v ita liz in g p s y c h o a n a ly tic c r i t i c i s m a n T p ^ 7
^ ntinued i n f l u e n c e o n l i t e r a r y c r i t i c i s m to d i v l u ^ e n s u r in g its
c r it ic s s u c h a s J u l i a K r i s t e v a , L u c e I r i g a r a y , a n d . ^ ^ 0^ 0 ^
HISTORICAL develo pm en t
S ig m u n d Freud
T h e th e o r ie s a n d p r a c t ic e o f S ig m u n d F r e u d ( 1 8 5 6 -1 9 3 9 ) p r o v id e th e fo u n
d a tio n f o r p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r i t i c i s m . W h i l e w o r k i n g w i t h p a t i e n t s w h o m h e
d ia g n o s e d a s h y s t e r i c s , F r e u d t h e o r i z e d t h a t t h e r o o t o f t h e i r p r o b l e m s w a s
p s y c h o lo g ic a l, n o t p h y s i c a l . H i s p a t i e n t s , h e b e l i e v e d , h a d s u p p r e s s e d i n c e s
tu o u s d e s ir e s t h a t t h e y h a d u n c o n s c i o u s l y r e f u s e d to c o n f r o n t . S u f f e r in g
fro m h is o w n n e u r o t i c c r i s i s i n 1 8 8 7 , F r e u d u n d e r w e n t s e l f - a n a l y s i s . R e s u l t s
fro m h i s s e l f - a n a l y s i s , t o g e t h e r w i t h h i s r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s e s o f p a t i e n t s ,
led F r e u d t o p o s i t t h a t f a n t a s i e s a n d w i s h f u l t h i n k i n g a n d n o t o n l y a c t u a l e x
p e r ie n c e s p l a y a l a r g e p a r t in t h e o n s e t o f n e u r o s e s .
M o d e ls o f t h e H u m a n P s y c h e : D y n a m i c M o d e l T h r o u g h o u t h i s l i f e t i m e ,
F reu d d e v e lo p e d v a r i o u s m o d e l s o f th e h u m a n p s y c h e , w h ic h b e c a m e th e
c h a n g in g b a s e s o f h i s p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t h e o r y a n d h i s p r a c t i c e . E a r l y i n h i s c a
reer, h e d e v e l o p e d t h e d y n a m i c m o d e l , a s s e r t i n g t h a t o u r m i n d s a r e a d i
ch o to m y c o n s is t in g o f th e c o n s c i o u s (th e r a tio n a l) a n d th e u n c o n s c io u s (th e
ir r a t io n a l). T h e c o n s c i o u s , F r e u d a r g u e d , p e r c e i v e s a n d r e c o r d s e x t e r n a l r e a l
ity a n d is t h e r e a s o n i n g p a r t o f t h e m i n d . U n a w a r e o f t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e u n
c o n s c io u s , w e o p e r a t e c o n s c i o u s l y , b e l i e v i n g t h a t o u r r e a s o n i n g a n d a n a l y t i c
sk ills a r e s o l e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r o u r b e h a v i o r . F r e u d is o n e o f t h e f i r s t t o s u g
g e st th a t it is t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , n o t t h e c o n s c i o u s , t h a t g o v e r n s a l a r g e p a r t o f
o u r a c t io n s .
T h is i r r a t i o n a l p a r t o f o u r p s y c h e , t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , r e c e i v e s a n d s t o r e s
our h id d e n d e s ir e s , a m b it io n s , f e a r s , p a s s io n s , a n d ir r a tio n a l th o u g h ts .
F re u d , h o w e v e r , d i d n o t c o i n t h i s t e r m ; t h i s h o n o r g o e s to C a r l G u s t a v C a r u s .
C a ru s a n d m a n y o f F r e u d 's o t h e r c o n t e m p o r a r i e s v i e w e d t h e u n c o n s c i o u s a s
a s ta tic s y s t e m t h a t s i m p l y c o l l e c t s a n d m a i n t a i n s o u r m e m o r i e s . F r e u d d r a
m a tic a lly r e d e f i n e d t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , b e l i e v i n g it to b e a d y n a m i c s y s t e m t h a t
n t o n ly c o n t a i n s o u r b i o g r a p h i c a l m e m o r i e s b u t a l s o s t o r e s o u r s u p p r e s s e d
and u n r e s o l v e d c o n f l i c t s . F r e u d b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e u n c o n s c i o u s h o u s e s h u -
U n i t y 's tw o b a s ic in s t in c t s : e r o s , o r th e s e x u a l in s t in c t (la te r re fe rre d to b y
, 26 C h a p ttr 6 P s y c h o a n a ly t ic C r i t i c i s m
Fnuid os Hbldo) and
'"HHir-i:s^:h
/r:rrs"sg
desires that want to jnpvitiblv make themselves known thr V
giiised truths Jp ds ofthTtirngue or our actions. Freud calls such miM^
? X ' ' * d i a n S l ip S - ThfT 8h T i n 8 ' y inn ^

actions such as accidental slips of the tongue, failures of memory, the mis.
placing of objects, or the misreading of texts, Freud beheves we bring t0ou,
conscious minds our unconscious wishes and intentions. It is especially in
our dreams, our art, our literature, and our play that these parapraxes reveal
our true intentions or desires.
Economic Model Freud's second model of the human psyche expands on

but retains most of the ideas he had developed in the dynamic model. In
both models, the conscious and the unconscious battle for control of a per
son's actions, and in both models, a person's unconscious desires will force
their way to the consciousness. In the economic model, Freud introduces
two new concepts that both describe and help govern the human psyche: the
pleasure principle and the reality principle. According to Freud, the pleasure
principle craves only pleasures, and it desires instantaneous satisfaction of
instinctual drives, ignoring moral and sexual boundaries established by soci
ety. Freud calls an individual's instinctual and psychic energy cathexes, its
chief aim being to maximize pleasure because the pleasure principle's goal is
immediate relief from all pain or suffering. The pleasure principle is usually
not allowed free rein in an individual's psyche because it is held in check bv
what Freud dubs the anti-cathexes or an anti-charge of energy governed by
the reality principle, that part of the psyche that recognizes the need for**"
cietal standards and regulations on pleasure. Freud believed that both these
principles are at war within the human psyche.
my<fddofP,heh!,MOdelS ? VCr his lon8 " * r , Freud developed yetanotl*

version of this m o i r ^ d " T " '1' 'y P 8 raPhical modcl'
the conscious thp n ' ? separated the human psyche into three p
mind's direct link to^xtT^1^ 8' 3nd unconscious. The conscious i
nal environment and therebv^ll'^ perceivin8 and reactin8 Wlh.
The preconscious is tlw ^ a,1()w,n8 the mind to order its outsu 0f
the mind allows to be . t(m?house of memories that the conscious
memories in some form V ? C(>nsc*usness without disgujs,a .
tends that the third part of n m Previusly devised models, F ^
unK(*rs, images thouehi ^ Psyehe, the unconscious, holds the ^ e$e
%ht8' and desires of human nature. * * * * *
i
Chapter 6 Psychoanalytic Criticism 127
desires are not housed in the preeonscious, they cannot be directly sum
m o n e d into the conscious state. These repressed impulses must, therefore,
travel in disguised forms to the conscious part of the psyche and surface in
their respective disguises in our dreams, our art, and in other unsuspecting
ways in our lives.
But the most famous model of the human psyche is Freud's revised ver
sion of the typographical model, the tripartite model, sometimes referred to
as the structural model. This model divides the psyche into three parts: the
id, the ego, and the superego. The irrational, instinctual, unknown, and un
conscious part of the psyche Freud calls the id. Containing our secret desires,
our darkest wishes, and our most intense fears, the id wishes only to fulfill
the urges of the pleasure principle. In addition, it houses the libido, the
source of all our psychosexual desires and all our psychic energy. Unchecked
by any controlling will, the id operates on impulse, wanting immediate sat
isfaction for all its instinctual desires.
The second part of the psyche Freud names the ego, the rational, logical,
waking part of the mind, although many of its activities remain in the un
conscious. Whereas the id operates according to the pleasure principle, the
ego operates in harmony with the reality principle. It is the ego's job to regu
late the instinctual desires of the id and to allow these desires to be released
in nondestructive ways.
The third part of the psyche, the superego, acts like an internal censor,
causing us to make moral judgments in light of social pressures. In contrast
to the id, the superego operates according to the morality principle and
serves primarily to protect society and us from the id. Representing all of so
ciety's moral restrictions, the superego serves as a filtering agent, suppress
ing the desires and instincts forbidden by society and thrusting them back
into the unconscious. Overall, the superego manifests itself through punish
ment. If allowed to operate at its own discretion, the superego will create an
unconscious sense of guilt and fear.
It is left to the ego to mediate between the instinctual (especially sexual)
desires of the id and the demands of social pressure issued by the superego.
What the ego deems unacceptable, it suppresses and deposits in the uncon
scious, and what it has most frequently repressed in all of us is our sexual de
sires of early childhood.
Freud's Pre-Oedipal Developmental Phase In addition to his various mod

els of the human psyche, Freud proposed several phases or stages of human
development that he believed are important to the healthy growth of one s
psyche. According to Freud, in our early childhood, all of us go through
three overlapping phases: the oral, anal, and phallic stages. As infants, we
experience the oral phase: When we suck our mother's breast to be fed, our
duality (or libido) is activated. Through this activity our mouths develop
mto an erotogenic zone that will later cause us to enjoy sucking our thumbs
Criticism
, 28 Ch..,*'' <* I'VchMnjly"
. ,,he second or anal stage (somctimo,
aml still later in life 'n.,' 1MUS becomes an object of plcasu. ' r>
^ ,hesadistic-anal phase ^ <nd> 8imultaneously, real!
children learn the * - ' ^ ' who arc separate from their mothers. DUr^>
they are independent pc rson. enic zone because children bec "S
this stage, the anus bonu ' (hJ ; h defecation as a means of c x r
sadistic, e x ilin g and d^ . y itement in discovering their independent
ing both their anger and the children also learn that thev,
fmm their mothers. By stage, a child's sexual
h C L 'd t o t e d t o ^ d the genitals when the child learns the pleasure tha,
results from stimulating; one s f^topm ent, Freud asserts that the pleasur
A, this point in a do Id Being self-centered, sadistic, anda 6
S S f f i S d cares for nothing but his or her own pleasure. If . chi|(J
fmwever is to grow up as a normal adult, he or she must develop a sense of
sexuality, a sense of his maleness or her femaleness. Freud maintains tha,
this awareness can be achieved by a successful handling of either the
Oedipus or the Electra complex.
The Oedipus, Castration, and Electra Complexes The formulation of the

Oedipus complex is one of Freud s most significant contributions not only
to psychoanalytic criticism but also to all literary criticism in general. Freud
borrows the name from the play Oedipus Rex, written by the Greek dramatist
Sophocles. In this play, Oedipus, the protagonist, is prophesied to kill his fa
ther and marry his mother. His attempts to defy the prophecy fail, and the
foretold events occur as predicted. According to Freud, the essence of
Oedipus's story becomes universal human experience, illustrating a forma
tive stage in each individual's psychosexual development when the child
transfers his love object from the breast (the oral phrase) to the mother.
Using Sophocles' plot as the basis for his Oedipus complex, Freud as
serts in his Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis (Twenty-first Lecture)
(1915-1917) that during the late infantile stage (somewhere between ages
three and six), all infant males possess an erotic attachment to their mothers.
Unconsciously, the infant desires to engage in sexual union with his mother,
but he recognizes a rival for his mother's affection: the father. Already in the
a. ,1Csta8e an<^ therefore, sexually aware of his own erogenous organs, the
chdd perceives the father's attention to the mother as sexual.
each must thp l^ ^Fk ^ Pment *s to proceed normally, Freud maintains,
selves their mothers v!^ castratl0n complex. From observing them-
ike thdr fathers0 whH^th8 , ^ boys know they havea
vents the male child fro & eir mothers and sisters do not. What pre
mother is fear of castration, C/l.tlI?uin8 to have incestuous desires for **
desire, identifies with his fath * ^ child' thus' rePresses his
h,S father' a^d hopes someday to possess a woman as
hi* father now possesses his mother Un
cessl'y made the transition to m a n h o o d t h e by ha# now suc-
Whereas a boy must successfully ..
come a normal man, a girl must success#,5 ?* * the ^ pus comnl..* i
she is to make the transition from a Kjri V negotiat<> the Electra comm ^
young girl is also erotically attracted to h 3 n rmal *m an Like T h ** '*
A g n iz e s a nval for her mother's a f f o r d m ther' and like a boy .h ! ? 3
g,rl realizes that she is already castrated, a s t h e r ' ' ' t "
he, father possesses that which she des res a ,her' < * . she know!
him and away from her mother. After the sT * ' he turns desires to
turns back toward the mother and idewilhh f ^
womanhood completed, the girl realizes thaôn ^
mother, will possess a man. Through her " e day she' too, like her
fulfilled desire for a penis (penis envy) win h nshlps with a man, her un
lack will be somewhat appeased. e mitlgated, and her sense of
The process of becoming a man or a woman c .
long and difficult, but it is necessary. For wifhT^L feUd maintained, may be
from basing his or her life on the pleasure the chlId Passes
sions are grounded in the immediate eraHfi^h r nder whic^ all deci-
principle, under which societal needs and ih f Pleasure, to the reality
guide decisions. During this stage Freud e operation of the superego
bility and conscience appear fo/the first time ^ ^ 3 Child s moraI sensi*
The Significance of Dreams According to Freud, even though the passage

into manhood or womanhood may be successful, every adult has stored
many painful memories of repressed sexual desires, anger, rage, and guilt in
his or her unconscious. Because the conscious and the unconscious are part
of the same psyche, the unconscious with its hidden desires and repressed
wishes continues to affect the conscious in the form of inferiority feelings,
guilt, irrational thoughts and feelings, and dreams and nightmares.
In his magnum opus, The Interpretation of Dreams (1900), Freud asserts
that the unconscious will express its suppressed wishes and desires. Even
though the conscious mind has repressed these desires and has forced them
into the unconscious, such wishes may be too hard for the conscious psyche
to handle without producing feelings of self-hatred or rage. The unconscious
then redirects and reshapes these concealed wishes into acceptable social ac
tivities, presenting them in the form of images or symbols in our dreams
and/or our writings. In the process, the psyche creates a window to the id by
allowing these softened and socially acceptable desires to seep into the con
scious state.
The psyche may create this window to the id in a variety of ways.
Through the process of displacement, for example, the unconscious may
switch a person's hatred for someone named Mr. Appleby onto a rotting
aPple in a dream. Or through condensation, the psyche may consolidate
ce.
t h r o u g h d r e a m s , jo k e s , o r o t h e r m e t h o d s t h e e g o m u s t a c t a n d b lo c k any
o u t w a r d r e s p o n s e I n s o d o i n g , th e e g o a n d id b e c o m e i n v o l v e d in a n inter,
n a l b a ttle F re u d c a lls n e u r o s is . F r o m a fe a r o f h e ig h t s to a p o u n d in g head
a c h e , n e u r o s i s c a n a s s u m e m a n y p h y s i c a l a n d p s y c h o l o g i c a l a b n o r m a litie s .
F r e u d a s s e r t s t h a t it is th e jo b o f t h e p s y c h o a n a l y s t t o i d e n t i f y t h e s e u n re
s o lv e d c o n f l i c t s t h a t g iv e r is e to a p a t i e n t 's n e u r o s i s . T h r o u g h p s y c h o a n a ly tic
t h e r a p y a n d d r e a m a n a l y s i s , th e p s y c h o t h e r a p i s t a t t e m p t s t o r e t u r n th e pa
t i e n t to a s t a t e o f w e l l - b e i n g o r n o r m a lc y .
L i t e r a t u r e a n d P s y c h o a n a l y s i s F o r F r e u d , t h e u n r e s o l v e d c o n f l i c t s th a t give
r is e to a n y n e u r o s is c o n s t i t u t e th e s t u f f o f l i t e r a t u r e . A w o r k o f lite r a tu r e , he
b e l i e v e s , is t h e e x t e r n a l e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e a u t h o r ' s u n c o n s c i o u s m in d .
A c c o r d in g ly , lit e r a r y w o r k s m u s t t h e n b e t r e a t e d l i k e a d r e a m , a p p l y in g psy
c h o a n a l y t i c t e c h n iq u e s to te x t s to u n c o v e r t h e a u t h o r ' s h i d d e n m o tiv a tio n s ,
r e p r e s s e d d e s ir e s , a n d w is h e s .
Carl G. Jung
F r e u d 's m o s t f a m o u s p u p i l is C a r l G u s t a v J u n g ( 1 8 7 5 - 1 9 6 1 ) , a S w is s p h y si
c i a n , p s y c h i a t r i s t , p h i l o s o p h e r , a n d p s y c h o l o g i s t . S e l e c t i n g J u n g a s h is fa
v o r ite s tu d e n t a n d s o n , " F r e u d a p p o i n t e d h i m h i s s u c c e s s o r . T o w a r d the
e n d o f t h e ir s e v e n - y e a r , t e a c h e r - d i s c i p l e r e l a t i o n s h i p ( 1 9 1 2 ) , h o w e v e r , Jung
p r o p h e tic a lly w ro te to F reu d , q u o tin g fro m N i e t z s c h e 's Thus Spflke
Zarathustra, O n e r e p a y s a t e a c h e r b a d l y i f o n e r e m a i n s o n l y a p u p i l . A year
la te r , th e p u p il b r o k e a w a y f r o m h i s m a s t e r a n d e v e n t u a l l y b e c a m e o n e of
t h e le a d in g fo r c e s in th e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c m o v e m e n t .
J u n g 's d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h s o m e e l e m e n t s o f F r e u d i a n p s y c h o a n a ly s is
a r o s e fr o m th e o r e tic a l d iffe r e n c e s w it h F r e u d c o n c e r n i n g t h e in te r p r e ta tio n of
d r e a m s a n d th e m o d e l o f th e h u m a n p s y c h e . A c c o r d i n g to F r e u d , a ll h u m a n be
h a v io r , in c lu d in g d r c a m s ' is f u n d a m e n t a lly s e x u a l s i n c e it i s d r i v e n b y a n i l *
d r e a l a h n 7 r e x c l7 s eX T ener8y' W h a t F r e u d c a l l s b i d o . F r e u d in t e r p r e t
o r I T c t r a Z r ^ T y .m 86X1,31 t6 r m s ' " n g m o s t o f t h e m to th e O e d i f *
b e h a v io r is s e x u a lly (lrfv e n S) u n e da W ' lh .F l? l ' d s b a s i c P ^ 'm i s e t h a t a ll

d o e s a p p e a r b u t s o d o m a n y o th e r k i n d s o / ', a *
p iv o ta l te x t, Symbols o f T r o lf 1 ,I n 1 9 1 2 Jung p u b lis h * "
fro m F re u d . In th is w o r k In n , . W' w l l I c h u l t i m a t e l y l e d t o h is s e p a f
a s w e ll a s s e x u a l o n e s . J u n e 's ^ d l x a m s i n c l u d e m y t h o lo g ic a l
a n a ly tic c o m m u n ity fo r tin . * a s c o u s c*d h im to b e b a n i s h e d fr o m th e j
y th e n e x t h v e y e a r s . D u r i n g t h i s t i m e , h e f o r m * * *
his own model of the hum an psyche, which would become his most impor
tant contribution to psychology and literary criticism.
In form ing his m odel of the human psyche, Jung accepts Freud's as
sumption that the unconscious exists and that it plays a major role in our
conscious decisions, but he rejects Freud's analysis of the contents of the
unconscious. For Jung, the human psyche consists of three parts: the personal
conscious, the personal unconscious, and the collective unconscious. The
personal conscious and the personal unconscious comprise the individual
psyche. The personal conscious, or waking state, is that image or t oug t o
which we are aware at any given moment. Like a slide s h o ^ every i^ m en
of our lives provides us with a new slide. As we view one s 1 e' e ^ . .
slide vanishes from our personal consciousness, or no m8
the personal conscious. Although these vanished sl.des are forgotten by
the personal conscious, they are stored and ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ e ^ n a l
unconscious. Jung maintains that all con^ ' ^ 0^, sHde8show is different,
unconscious. Since each person s moment y
everyone's personal unconscious is ^ cej>s* nnff ^ nT hu m an consciousness
In the depths of the psyche and blockedo unconscious,
Ues the third part of Jung s model of th P Y ^ universai than the per-
that part of the psyche that is more impe . Qf tê pSyChe houses
sonal conscious or the personal unconscious. g ^ tê entire human
the cumulative knowledge, experiences, an ^ worl(j respond to certain
species. According to Jung, people from a o ne jôws and appreci-
myths or stories in the same way, not eca f collective unconscious are
ates the same story, but because lying eep rcording to Jung/ this collective
the species' memories of humanity s pas jjective, universal, and imper-
unconscious is "a second psychic system o ^,, universal psychic
sonal nature which is identical in all m ai human themes and corn-
aspect is an inherited receptacle of deep,,p of archetypes, which are
monalities. These m emories exist in encessuch as birth, death, re-
Pattems or images of repeated human expe feW_-that express them-
bih, the four seasons, and motherhood, to ^ ^ fantasies. A rchehjes
*lves in our stories, our dreams, our rel 'jonS/ causing us to respond to
are not ready-made ideas, but are hcrited genetically (a psy^-c,
s">uli in certain ways. In addition, they a r e , collective unconsoous
......... certam way>-
J --------" \
^mking up an
k i n e Up _ _ Unhme9 ""uive
g ^ t dform
u e of
to
not a biological, irfter'tance)^ b c,jeVes (and arel >h eP ^ tha, have been
ness for all humankind. J our anCest and s0rro - literature in
ûntless typical experience type' C,f Occurring Retypes
-numerable experiences ^ * * . * . 1 ^ raCter IJJP * ^
Repeated countless times m imaged similar produce
form of recurrent plot pattern- tions * * e u n c o n ^ n i P
ar<?capable of stirring up p ^ \ n the co ^ ha9 little contn
they awaken images s t o r e u t i a y
^'ngs or emotions over w i
*-***
'4
i iiii o * - f T h e s e s o m e w h a t'.1"*
% & * * " * of ,he 8,irri" K

" I U - - one^genera thjn
co0tro1' would arb from n oinena become myths 0r
a0,m wch Passenv such p people's lives. )n6 wu,d
responses. Eventuul>y' ifieance ' ^ ^ expressions of tv><!
ra! aihPr social firoUP caning anf th* af* . L y t h s and modern stories
stories th.^t help g jv e - - ing that
Partl^s that help gv^ nserting * * ^ y c h m y -e " B
Both myths
? oVer, ana moaern
proving stor
their thematic
strongly dsag
St0f nelV disagree, a. ^ drama q{ the psy and over, proving
a Gf th^ ols over and ^ archetypethe anim; their them,
inner, uncon. archetypal symbols bois, the archetypethe an; ^
ôften
e r Portrayrh1
N n c o rOUgh
^ ^ erepetition
t y r ^ o of t such
sue 3 ^ smasculine
X ^ c u U n e in
in the
the femalel.
female) JJ*is.
importance. male), the anim n be applied to the interpret; e
mo*hermandrebirth, to name a few " mânings of human stories and < *
h ? understand the underlying is continually using symbols frL
denies, because the life, such symbols help us
[he collective psychic pool ^ k commonalities of life. For Jung, sloties
m o r e deeply info the a r c t e ^ archetypes evidence themselves n o t nly
,uni r r dd-
o p in ^ l^ ^ eth o d s of analytica^pay^tulugy^y^ûnû^npply^his^fhîries^^
S o d s to literature, w entieth century is Northrop Frye. *

the foremost archetypal critic or
Northrop Frye o r k A n a to m y o f C r itic is m : F o u r Essays i n 19 5 7 ,

W ith th e p u bH cation o f h i s âm e ^ p r i m a r y a d v o c a t e o f t h e p r i n c i p l e s of
N o rth ro p F ry e (1 912 n e v e r d e c l a r e s a l l e g i a n c e t o J u n g s con cep t
a rch ety p a l criticism . A l t f t ? b o r r o w s J u n g ' s i d e a s a b o u t m y t h s and
o f th e c o lle c tiv e u n c o n sc i ' y p p ro a c h t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c a l l e d arche-
archetypes and deve ops a systemahc a p p ^ ^ .V ^ ^
typal or m ythic criticis Uf lructurc o r m y t h i c d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t
maintains that there exis s c significance o f a i l t e x t s . A l l l i t e r a t u r e , he
explains both e x p l i c i t l y a l l e g o r i c a l to
argues, is on a sliding sea , g TH ^ r r h e t v o a l symbols fo u n d
the most an tiallegorical and antrexphert. T h e a * e t y p U sy ,
within literature help to emphasize an d p o r t r a y t h e a l e g y^ ^
story every author is telling. The overall s t r u c P b e c a u s e t h i s kind
declares Frye, are to be derived from a r c h e t y p a l c r i t i c i s m b e c a u
C|*aptur 6 [>HVr,
Hychoanalvtir rr{.i
l)fcrilic.smpa-s.,pps,.s a l,lrB1.rc() V
fl,u-n.al form and structure in l i t ' " - m t u r e a, , wh(>. . . .
j eepe** imagery and most abstract m , . / myth, for mvo 7Tu m st
, 1) other forms of literature, myth is th Kof anV kind oHi* pt)**i'SSi' the
most directly related through $ * a
Frve believes that all of litentur 8 nd
story called the monomyth. This >">plcte and whole
c!e containing four separate phases, with each nh be diaKranwd as a c r-
son of the year and to peculiar cycles 0f ho Phase conwpondinK to a Z
phase located at the top of the circle, is i 1 ! ^ ^ ro m an ce
our wishes are fulftlled, and we can achieveTotTh St<>ry- ,n ,his ory, all
the circle ts winter, or the antiromance nhas. haPpmess-At the bottom of
this phase tells the story of bondage imDrk h<? pPosite of summer,
M idw ay between romance and a n t i r o m a n J frustrationr and fear,
of the circle is the spring phase, or cornedv TV ^ r'8ht f the midd,e
of our rise from antiromance and frustrati # PhaSe relates the story
Correspondingly, across the circle is tragedv nr n? and haPPiness.
fall from the romance phase and from happiness anH narratin8 our
According to Frye, all stories can be placedôm ew h^ h e e * o n ) io disaster-
What Frye provides for us is a schemaHr nf n ^ thlS dia8ram-
Such a structural framework furnishes the c o n ^ t P?SS1^)e kmds of stories-
stories based on their particular genre kinds of ere^ we can'dentify
of view, and other literary e l e m e n t addition f f ? " ' themeS' poinls
background and context for his form of literary c 'r ife fs m ^ S w ^ to to m !
Pare d ntr3f storl<* " lhe basis of their relaHonships among th em ilvS
I Q ^ f b the advent archetypal criticism and Frye's schematics in the
J qao ' 7 nhcs used Prcudian analysis in their practical criticism. But in the
1960s, the French psychoanalyst, Neo-Freudian, and poststructuralist critic
Jacques Lacan helped revive Freudian criticism and, through his work, res
cued it from its overwhelmingly phallocentric or male-dominated position.
Jacques Lacan
Similar to Freud, Jacques Marie Emile

unconscious greatly affects our . " ^ uclured, bubbling cauldron of dark
tures the unconscious as a chaotic, un Lacan asserts that the un-
passions, hidden desires, and S h e s t r u c t u r e of language. Like language,
conscious is structured, much like t systematically ana-
this highly structured part of the h u m a n s claims Lacan, is that all in-
tyzed. What we will learn from such an c < ' ^ ideal concept of a wholly
dividuals are fragmented; no one is w o t . thcit, an abstraction
unified and psychologically complete md.v.dual J
that is simply not attainable.
C hapter 6 Psychoanalyst: C riticism
1M
L acan 's M od el o f th e H um an P sy c h e S im ila r to F re u d , [
three-part model of the hum an psyche. In Freud s m o d el, th<? C|,h tj
the id, the ego, and the superego greatly d eterm in e o u r b eh av io r9cti * S
an's model is the basic assum ption that lan g u ag e sh a p es _ r X ,4
Lacan u ncon sciou s and c o n scio u s m in d s w h ile
nd1 U|nr,Vir*f
*l|h^ *1^
structures our ha
of three parts, or orders: th*. * <>ur
osvche consit> order. A s in Freud's f
^ U'FornLacan, the human and the r ^ others From birth u n t V ^ t
order, the syn . interacts orim arily in the im aging,^
lnal . each of the funCt " taln T o u rw ish es our fan^ * .
where* around six ^ p; yche that q{ Qur psychic d e v e l o p ^ - > t
that is, in the part images. In this P receivm g our food, our Care'
most important, our g ith our mo x state, w e rely on imag ' aM
r^ o y fu lty ' " t o m t e r . In w orld. Consequently, our .
- - S S S & . t r s - - ~ no* able ,o Ua,e wh^
SO" '<i^ h "lo o W n g -g 'a " " '" r i c a l l y seeing ourselves m our molh
Lacan calls the 1 while metapho g us to perceive images that hav
ourselves m a m irr0r image P aw are of ourselves as mdepJ*
image. Observing *> *uowing us to S mothers. This m irror image o f ^
discrete boim ' separate from o ideal, an illusion because unliv'
dent bein8s ^ le and complete bemg^ ^ control of ourselves. We cannot
selves as a image, we are not eat w hen w e so desire.
the actual nurrove ^ bodieS as we stagG/ w e com e to recognize cer-
for e* amp* ' to Lacan, during the lves, w hat Lacan calls objet petU a
t n objects as being separate from t e) a although Lacan wished the
S .< term is usually translated o ) t cts inclu d e elim inating bodily
^ ase to remain untranslated. Th and our ow n speech sounds. When
Phra our m other's voice and b ' yearn for them . Lacan says such
theseohjects or soundsw e no* in d this sense of lack will continue to
p a s s ^ dominates our fulfill " 1 of hers. But we, like

Heve can fulfill all our wishes th at We are sep arate entities who can
o T o,heorSa he.orefS ^ r s . kacan says that such total unity
andTwholeness are an illusion. beings w ho are separate from our
Once we leam that we are 1 secon d developm ental phase, the
m others, w e are ready to m other dom inates the im aginary
S S *bd " s % ^ hi this Phase, w e learn language.
Ch P * r 6 . P s y c h o s ,yticC[Wcjsm
135
is tenguage that shapra our Wenlity a s ^ a ,b^ . u Lacan believ

^vches. Using linguistic principles formulated bv l be!ngS* nd mold8ur
S a t i e s , Ferdinand de Saussure, Lacan declared, ^ 7 m d7 n
Lveen individual sounds and words on the basis of diff d,f^re" t,ate be
^ d m ig h t , for example, because it is d i f f e r s L l ' 1 1 7 We know ,he
se it differs from Ml. Knowing and mastering this concept'
enables us to enter and to pass through the symbolic order successfu y
Lacan contends that m the symbolic order we learn to differentiate be
tween male and fema e. This process of learning gender identity is based on
difference and loss. Whereas in the imaginary order we delighted in the
presence of our mother, in the symbolic order, we learn that our father comes
to represent cultural norms and laws. He stands between us and our mother,
and it is he who enforces cultural rules by threatening to castrate us if we do
not obey. Since the castration complex is obviously different for boys and
girls, the process of completing the symbolic order successfully is different
for each sex.
F o r L a c a n , w h a t s e x w e a r e is b io lo g ic a lly d e te r m in e d , b u t o u r g e n d e r o r
our s e x u a lity is c u l t u r a l l y c r e a t e d . S o c ie t y d e c r e e s , fo r e x a m p le , th a t a little
boy s h o u ld p la y w it h c a r s a n d a lit t le g ir l w ith d o lls . It is th e fa th e r , th e
p ow er s y m b o l, w h o e n f o r c e s t h e s e c u ltu r a l r u le s a n d e n s u r e s w e fo llo w
th e m . B o t h s e x e s c o m e t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r o w n s e x u a l i t y b y o b s e r v i n g w h a t
th e y a r e n o t , a b o y n o t i n g t h a t h e d o e s n o t d o t h e t h i n g s a y o u n g g i r l d o e s
and v ic e v e r s a . E a c h m u s t r e c o g n i z e t h a t h e o r s h e w ill fo r e v e r b e a s p lin
te r e d s e l f , n e v e r a g a i n b e i n g a b l e t o e x p e r i e n c e t h e w h o l e n e s s a n d j o y o f
b e in g o n e w i t h h i s o r h e r m o t h e r i n t h e i m a g i n a r y o r d e r .
F o r th e b o y , e n t r y in t o th e s y m b o lic o r d e r d ic ta te s th a t h e m u s t id e n tify
w ith a n d a c k n o w l e d g e t h e f a t h e r a s b o t h t h e s y m b o l o f s o c i e t y s p o w e r a n d
as th e o b j e c t t h a t b l o c k s t h e b o y ' s d e s i r e f o r s e x u a l u n i o n w i t h h i s m o t h e r .
For th e g ir l, e n t r y i n t o t h e s y m b o l i c o r d e r a ls o d e c r e e s t h a t s h e , to o , a c
k n o w le d g e t h e f a t h e r o r t h e m a l e a s t h e s y m b o l o f p o w e r i n s o c i e t y . L i k e t h e
boy, s h e w i s h e s t o r e t u r n t o t h e h a p p y s t a t e o f u n i o n w i t h h e r m o t h e r i n t e
i m a g in a r y o r d e r . U n l i k e t h e b o y , h o w e v e r , s h e m a i n t a i n s m o r e a c c e s s t h a n
h e to t h is p r e - O e d i p a l s t a g e a s s h e g r o w s u p . .
L a c a n d e c la r e s t h a t e n t e r i n g t h e s y m b o lic o r d e r is a o rm o c a s n*
for b o t h s e x e s . I n L a c a n ' s v i e w , c a s t r a t i o n i s s y m b o l i c , n o t l i t e r a l , a n d r e p r e -
sents e a c h p e r s o n 's l o s s o f w h o l e n e s s a n d h i s o r h e r a c c e p a n c e o
^ le s . F o r th e m a le , it m e a n s a c c e p t in g th e fa th e r,
P o s s e s s e s a p h a l l u s o r p e n i s . L i k e w i s e , t h e f e m a l e m iu s t rno ^
fa th er f i g u r e a s d o m i n a n t b u t a l s o a c c e p t h e r l a c o ap ai ^ b e tw e e n th e
d fe r e n tia tio n b e t w e e n s e x a n d g e n d e r , L a c a " b e Co m e s fo r L a c a n ,

Pouis, t h e a c t u a l b i o l o g i c a l o r g a n , a n d t h e p ' , th e o b je c t th a t g iv e s
lu P o s t s t r u c t u r a l t e r m s , t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a s i g m i , p h a llu s is th e
W a n in g to a ll o t h e r o b je c t s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , f o r L a c a n , m e p
. |.<ychO.'>ly,U' Cti,iCiSn , ,
136 ch'H" 'r h ' . nor fomnles can ever
,x-nis. g>v'R I " ........... theory

, (>f Lacan's ........
and his Und*
n and Textual Analysis At the 1 ^ anJ fragmentation. All of us hay'
St'mdins of the hunian psyc je aje and for countless obpet. but n,h.
longings for love, for P ^ * * 1 ^ the imaginary order and be at one wh
o can fulfill our desire >1 ^ divided self, concerns Lacan when he ex-
or mother. This fragnrentat.on, o ^ hold the possibility of cap,Ur.
amines a literary text. For Lacan l ,Q th .magmary order and
ing, at least for a moment, our dcs ^ ^ once whole and united wh ^
regain that sense of pure |yw
mothers. , 0 j00ks for elements of the third and most
In examining a text, Lacan a psyche/ the real order. On the
remote and unreachable part o hvsical world, including the mater-
one hand, the real order consis ,h/ other hand, the real order also sym-
ial universe and everything i n , ^ would say, the real order contains
bolizes all that a person is n o . continually function for us as symbols of
countless objet petit a, objects that c >mmu y entire physical ^
primordial we can never experienceor
verse are not and can never be addition, as Lacan contends,
really know them except through language, ^ ^ Lacan-S ^
it is language that causes our r g capture jouissancethat is, to call
ory, literature has f ^ ^ ^ ^ t V e s i r e t h a t somehow arises from deep
^ th in L tT n T o td o isV sy ch e and reminds us of a time of perfect whole-
ness when we were incapable of differentiating among images from the rea
order More frequently than not, these experiences are sexual, although other
images and experiences such as birth or death can serve this function. Such
moments of joy Lacan frequently finds in the writings of Poe, Shakespeare,
and Joyce.
TH E PRESEN T STATE OF P SY C H O A N A L Y T IC C R IT IC IS M
Thanks primarily to Lacan, psychoanalytic criticism has enjoyed new PP^

larity. In particular, feminist critics such as Sandra Gilbert and Susan
(Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century -
Imagination, 1979), Jul lia Kds ^ R o w e ls o f ! l e Litem,
1982; Revolution in Toetic
SexualI's i T T - ,984>' : and Luce 'rig a ra y (A n E thics4
------- ,r? ci!1 m>dels
Lacan----------------- .<,v.cato
mshow
uuw the ntmu v * adaPt
Psychologicaj
me psychological
bo,h Freud's
conflicts and concern5
c o n flic t s a>lu
and
'*
rjtics
ifirS
encountered by female writers in a male-dominated w orld. Other c
'-wapwr f)
1sychoanalytic Criticism 1 3 7
h as FtMix Gviatteri (1930-1992) have continue u
"^Lacan's ideas, devising their own model (\ n h T b th Freud'8
Although many present-day critics reject Freud's L m hUma" psyche'
^ .ries preferring a less sexually centered c, ha Ilie-centered sexual
^ id's dream-work and the linguistic svmboli some stll embrace
5 1 origin psychoanalyst. 8 ' Symbohcally interpretive methods of
as s u m p t i o n s
The foundation for m ost form s of psychoanalytic criticism belongs to Freud

and his theories and techniques developed during his psychiatric practice.
Whether any practicing psychoanalytic critic uses the ideas of Jung Frye
Lacan, or any other psychoanalyst, all acknowledge Freud as the intellectual
center of this form of criticism .
C e n t r a l t o p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r i t i c i s m is F r e u d 's a s s u m p t i o n t h a t a l l a r t i s t s ,
in c lu d in g a u t h o r s , a r e n e u r o t i c . U n l i k e m o s t o t h e r n e u r o t i c s , t h e a r t i s t e s
ca p e s m a n y o f t h e o u t w a r d m a n i f e s t a t i o n s a n d r e s u l t s o f n e u r o s i s , s u c h a s
m a d n ess o r s e l f - d e s t r u c t i o n , b y f in d in g a p a t h w a y b a c k to s a n e n e s s a n d
w h o le n e s s in t h e a c t o f c r e a t i n g h i s o r h e r a r t .
F re u d m a in ta in s t h a t a n a u t h o r 's c h i e f m o tiv a tio n fo r w r itin g is to g r a t
ify s o m e s e c r e t d e s i r e , s o m e f o r b i d d e n w i s h t h a t p r o b a b l y d e v e l o p e d d u r i n g
the a u t h o r 's i n f a n c y a n d w a s i m m e d i a t e l y s u p p r e s s e d a n d d u m p e d i n t h e
u n c o n s c io u s . T h e o u t w a r d m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h i s s u p p r e s s e d w i s h b e c o m e s
the l i t e r a r y w o r k i t s e l f . F r e u d d e c l a r e s t h a t t h e l i t e r a r y w o r k is i n d e e d t h e
a u th o r 's d r e a m o r f a n t a s y . B y u s i n g F r e u d 's p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t e c h n i q u e s d e
v e lo p e d f o r d r e a m t h e r a p y , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r i t i c s b e l i e v e w e c a n " u n l o c k "
the h i d d e n m e a n i n g s c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n t h e s t o r y a n d h o u s e d i n s y m b o l s .
O n ly th e n c a n w e a r r i v e a t a n a c c u r a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e te x t .
B e c a u s e F r e u d b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e l i t e r a r y t e x t is r e a l l y a n a r t i s t 's d r e a m o r
fan tasy, t h e t e x t c a n a n d m u s t b e a n a l y z e d l i k e a d r e a m . F o r F r e u d , s u c h a n
u n d e r s t a n d in g o f a t e x t m e a n s t h a t w e m u s t a s s u m e t h a t t h e d r e a m i s a d i s
g u ised w i s h . A l l o f o u r p r e s e n t w i s h e s , F r e u d b e l i e v e d , o r i g i n a t e d i n s o m e
w ay d u r in g i n f a n c y . A s a n i n f a n t , w e l o n g e d t o b e b o t h s e n s u a l l y a n d e m o
tio n a lly s a t i s f i e d . T h e m e m o r y o f t h e s e s a t i s f i e d i n f a n t i l e d e s i r e s p r o v i d e s
the f e r t ile g r o u n d f o r o u r p r e s e n t w i s h e s t o o c c u r . A l l p r e s e n t w i s h e s a r e ,
th e re fo re , r e - c r e a t i o n s o f a p a s t i n f a n t i l e m e m o r y e s p e c i a l l y e l e m e n t s o f t h e
O e d ip a l p h a s e b r o u g h t t o t h e s u r f a c e o f o u r u n c o n s c i o u s a n d c o n s c i o u s
states t h r o u g h s e n s a t i o n s , e m o t i o n s , a n d o t h e r p r e s e n t - d a y s i t u a t i o n s .
B u t th e a c t u a l w is h is o f t e n to o s t r o n g a n d to o fo r b id d e n to b e a c k n o w l
ed ged b y t h e m i n d ' s c e n s o r , t h e e g o . A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e e g o d i s t o r t s a n d h i d e s
the w is h o r latent content o f t h e d r e a m , th e r e b y a llo w in g th e d r e a m e r to re -
me m b e r a s o m e w h a t c h a n g e d a n d o f t e n t i m e s r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t d r e a m . T h e
1M Chaplet 6 Psychoanalytic Criticism
d u n it t h is c h a n g e d d r e a m o r w f m r
d r e a m e r te lls th e d r e a m a n a J n tu r n , th e d r e a m a n a ly s t m u st ^
c a lls th e d r e a m 's n u n ife. , c o n v e r s a t i o n a n d c a r e f u ll y a * triP
b a c k th e v a r io u s la y e r s V '' . f t " analysts jo b is m u c h l i k e th a U rf
r m u ltip le la y e r s o f
th e .u .. .r .v ------------
> , h i8 t ( > r ic a , * , .
u n c o v e r s a v a i u e u m s i o n c a i s i t e la
yer by
analyst m u s t p e a , back t h e v a r i o u s ^
e r s 0f
* ^ ' u k M h e ' Z a Z Z l ^ l T t Z p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r i t i c b e l i e v e s th a t an
t h o r s s t o r y is a d m a m th a t, o n th e s u r f a c e , r e v e a l s o n l y t h e m a n t l e s , c o n ,* ,,
o t th e tr u e ta le . H id d e n a n d c e n s o r e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e s t o r y o n v a r to u s level,
lie s th e la t e n t c o n t e n t o f th e s to r y , it s r e a l m e a n i n g o r in t e r p r e t a t io n . More
fr e q u e n tly th a n n o t, th is la t e n t c o n t e n t d i r e c t l y r e l a t e s t o s o m e e le m e n t and
m e m o r y o f th e O e d ip a l p h a s e o f o u r d e v e l o p m e n t . B y d i r e c t l y a p p ly in g the
t e c h n iq u e s e m p lo y e d in F r e u d ia n d r e a m a n a l y s i s , t h e p s y c h o a n a ly t ic critic
b e lie v e s th e a c t u a l, u n c e n s o r e d w is h c a n b e b r o u g h t t o t h e s u r f a c e , revealing
th e s t o r y 's tr u e m e a n in g .
P s y c h o a n a l y s t s d o n o t a ll a g r e e w i t h F r e u d ' s b a s i c a s s u m p t io n s , as
n o te d e a r lie r in th is c h a p te r . F o r e x a m p le , J u n g b e l i e v e s t h a t m y th o lo g ic a l as
w e ll a s s e x u a l im a g e s a p p e a r in o u r d r e a m s , a n d F r y e b o r r o w s th is assum ption
fr o m J u n g a n d d e v e lo p s a s c h e m a t ic fo r i n t e r p r e t i n g a l l d r e a m s a n d stories.
L a c a n , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , d i s a v o w s F r e u d 's a s s u m p t i o n t h a t th e u n co n
s c io u s is a c a u ld r o n o f b o ilin g p a s s io n s a n d a n n o u n c e s t h a t t h e u n co n scio u s
is a s h ig h ly s t r u c t u r e d a s la n g u a g e it s e lf . B y a n a l y z i n g t h i s s t r u c t u r e , Lacan
d e c la r e s th a t n o o n e c a n a c h i e v e w h o l e n e s s b e c a u s e w e a r e a ll a n d w ill al
w a y s r e m a in fra g m e n te d in d iv id u a ls w h o are s e e k in g c o m p le te n e s s .
N e v e r t h e le s s , a ll o f th e s e th e o r is t s w it h t h e i r a c c o m p a n y i n g t h e o r ie s relate in
s o m e w a y to F r e u d 's p r e s u p p o s it io n s .
METHODOLOGIES
F ir s t in tr o d u c e d to lite r a r y s t u d ie s in th e 1 9 2 0 s a n d 1 9 3 0 s , F r e u d 's psychoana

ly tic c r it ic is m s till s u r v iv e s to d a y . A l t h o u g h its m e t h o d s h a v e b e e n challenged,
r e v is e d , a n d s u p p le m e n t e d , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r i t i c i s m p r o v i d e s a stim ulating
a p p r o a c h to l it e r a r y a n a ly s is t h a t d e c r e e s t h a t w e h u m a n s a r e c o m p le x yet
s o m e w h a t u n d e r s ta n d a b le c r e a tu r e s w h o o f t e n f a il to n o t e t h e in flu e n c e of the
u n c o n s c io u s o n b o th o u r m o t iv a t io n s a n d o u r e v e r y d a y a c t io n s .
,r s c v 7 a l d<* a d e s a f t e r it s i n t r o d u c t i o n , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r itic is m f c
a n ^ lt T h " y "v ! a U " r K n o w n a s P s y c h o b i o g r a p h y , t h i s m e th o d

Z u e h b i o e r T , y a m a S S i" B b ' 8 r a p h > c a l i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t a n
a te d t i w ' r ' u CrS" n a l lc H c r e ' I w t u r e s , a n d a n y o t h e r d o c u m e n t ^
co lected w ,!,Z y t T '" Z Usi"H da a"d the authors
w o r k s ) , p s y c h o a n a l y t i c c r i t i c s b e l i e v e d t h e y c o u l d th e o r e t 11>,
Chapter 6 . Psychoanalytic Criticism 139
truct the author's personality, with all its idiosvnrr,.-

^ conflicts, and more important, neuroses i/tu J ' ntL*rnal and ex-
^toy declared, could illuminate an author's S i 3 the*
^ ' 1 the latent content
comnu uiin me
the autnor
author'ss texts Rv TW "T.orks'
"'"' K,vmg
lading of the author, these critics assumed they J be b e S b l e to
L en t an author s canon Of particular interest to them were the hveTand
S k s of such writers as Edgar Allan Poe, William Blake, and Leonardo da
Vinci' to name a ew.
In the 1950s, psychoanalytic critics turned their attention away from
psychobiography to character analysis, studying the various aspects of char
acters' minds found in an author's canon. Such a view gave rise to a more
complex understanding of a literary work. Individual characters within a text
n0w became the focus. Believing that the author had in mind a particular
personality for his or her characters, such critics also noted that readers de
velop their own conceptions of each character's personality. A character's
motivations and actions, then, became more complex than simply attribut
ing them to the author's ideas. How individual readers interpreted charac
ters now became an integral part of the text's interpretation. Whereas the
author creates a character, a reader re-creates the same character, bringing to
the text and to an individual character all the reader's experiences and
knowledge. The character simultaneously becomes the creation of the author
and of the reader. To interpret the story, psychoanalytic analyses of both the
author and the reader are, therefore, necessary.
Today many psychoanalytic critics realize that the reader plays a major
role in interpreting a work. Understanding ourselves from a Freudian point
of view as well as the context in which we live is considered essential if we
are to interpret a text.
One of the most controversial psychoanalytic techniques used today in
volves applying Freud's key assumptionthat all human behavior is sexu
ally drivendirectly to a text. In the hands of novice critics, who are often
ill- or misinformed about Freud's psychoanalytic techniques, everything in a
text more frequently than not becomes a sexual image. For these critics,
every concave image, such as a flower, a cup, a cave, or a vase, is a yonic
symbol (female), and any image whose length exceeds its diameter, such as
a tower, a sword, a knife, or a pen, becomes a phallic symbol (male).
Consequently, a text containing a dance, a boat floating into a cave, or a pen
king placed within a cup is interpreted as a symbol of sexual intercourse.
From this perspective, all images and actions within a text must be traced to
the author's id because everything in a text is ultimately the hidden wishes
frhe author's libido. ... , ,
Another psychoanalytic approach is archetypal criticism, irs t
jj* d by Jung then later by Frye. In this form of analysis, critics exam'
F * * discover the various archetypes that they observe
m lung's view, these archetypes have the same meaning for all readers.
s t ^ - 3 3
H,min^m e modem archetypal approaches to literature, critics focus on the
mvthic concepts within texts. One such critic is Joseph Campbell
(1904-1^87), a critic-scholar who has written extensively withm the field of
mythology and literature concerning the ways that archetypal symbols p0,
tray human experience. In his influential work The Hero with a Thousand Faces
(1949) Campbell focuses on the journey of the archetypa ero in myths and
in all literature as a whole. He asserts that psychoanalysts such as "Freud,
Jung, and their followers have demonstrated irrefutably that the logic, the
heroes, and the deeds of myth survive into modern times." Accordingly,
Campbell argues that the human psyche and modern literature directly
relate to the ancient, primordial myths and themes. Because of this relation
ship, we must probe literature for such themes. By understanding the an
cient stories and themes, seeing their relationship to modern stories, and
applying archetypal psychoanalysis, Campbell believes that we may better
understand not only our world but also each other, and even our own inner
psyches. Other psychoanalysts such as David Leeming and James Hillman
employ Jung's and Campbell's ideas and ^heories in their works, spanning
psychology, mythology, and literature.
Another type of psychoanalytic criticism employed today is based on
ideas developed by Jacques Lacan. A Lacanian critic attempts to uncover
how a text symbolically represents elements of the real, the imaginary, and
the symbolic orders. By identifying the symbolic representations of these or
ders within the text, a Lacanian critic examines how each of these symbols
demonstrates the fragmentary nature of the self. Such a demonstration, the
critic believes, shows the reader that all individuals are in actuality splin
tered selves. The overall purpose of a Lacanian analysis is to teach us that a
fully integrated and psychologically whole person does not exist and that
we must all accept fragmentation.
Psychoanalytic criticism is also being employed by feminist critics. Using
some of Freud s concerns but "rescuing" Freud from his male-dominated cul-
Kritmva nder!*tand"g are psychoanalytic critics such as Julia Kristeva.
v M o Z h 7 \ Z l ail ame? dl COncePts from Freud, Lacan, anthropology
LmanaLds. Ellbora?' ^ Phenomenlgy and develops a new science,
posits that during a premirror st idea of the mirror staSe' Kristf !
child experiences a l irL- â stage that she argues Lacan ignores),
o r s ig n if ic a n c e , m o v in g f m m T h i s l n ' k ^ m o l h e r t h a t shaPeS
th a t is tild to o u r i n s t in c t s it, i ' 7 o r n m * t o d e s i r e . A n e m o t i o n a l ft
nstmets thus develops, what Kristeva calls the semloH^'
C o p t e r s . psychMnalyt.cCriticUm
141
ât lie within each o f us.
QUESTIONS f o r a n a l y s is
. B ecau se p s y c h o a n a ly t ic c r it ic is m is b a s e d o n m u ltip le m o d e ls o f th e m in d r a th e r
than o n a n a e s th e tic th e o ry , th is c r itic a l a p p r o a c h to te x tu a l a n a ly s is c a n u se th e
m e th o d o lo g y o f a v a r ie t y o f s c h o o ls o f c r itic is m . E x p la in h o w th e c ritic a l m e th
ods o f N e w C r itic is m , r e a d e r -o r ie n te d c r itic is m , a n d d e c o n s tru c tio n th e o ry a n d
p ractice c a n b e u s e d in a p s y c h o a n a ly tic r e a d in g o f a text. W h a t s im ila ritie s d o
these s c h o o ls o f c r it ic is m h a v e in c o m m o n w ith p s y c h o a n a ly s is ?
U sin g H a w th o r n e 's s h o r t s to r y " Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n ," a n a ly z e th e p ro ta g o
nist fro m e a c h o f th e f o llo w in g p e r s p e c tiv e s : F re u d ia n , Ju n g ia n , a n d L a c a n ia n .
U sin g H a w th o r n e 's " Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n ," id e n tify th e d iffe re n t im a g e s a n d
stru ctu ral p a tte r n s th a t o c c u r in th e te x t. T h e n , u s in g y o u r u n d e rsta n d in g o f p s y
ch o a n a ly tic c r itic is m , e x p la in th e p r e s e n c e o f th e s e im a g e s an d p a tte rn s a n d a n a
lyze h o w e a c h r e la te s to a n o v e r a ll p s y c h o a n a ly tic in te rp re ta tio n o f th e te x t itself.
In v e s tig a te th e lif e o f N a t h a n ie l H a w th o r n e , a n d a p p ly th e p r in c ip le s o f p s y
c h o b io g ra p h y to h is s h o r t s to r y " Y o u n g G o o d m a n B r o w n ."
CRITIQUES AND R ESPO N SES
In the past several d ecad es, m uch "Freu d bashing has occurred, growing
from simply being an argum ent against Freud and his theories to a m ove
ment. W hereas Freu d w as on ce d eclared a genius, now adays he is often
dubbed a "very troubled m an ," w ith his technique of psychoanalysis being
declared a oseud nsrience bv m any psychologists, physicians, linguists, epis-
* nlore the workings of the human psyche through tu

criticism continue to explore Campbell, Julia Kristeva, Gilles Deh. the
wrings ofJacques l S i in >he relationships
FtMix Guattan, and a host of ot d the arts. 8 th
human psyche, culture, socte Y'P ' vided for present-day scholar*
Although fteud'- f ^ n e s examine the human ^
theorists a springboar o y been criticized for multiple reasn 6
*."> .6ly lr6um.JHy.li.ble mouulu.u el .I ,,,,,,:

cal knowledge Second, by emphasizing such an extensive body of theory
befom a text can be analyzed, some critics argue that psychoanalytic crifr
cism detracts from what should be a critic's firs concern: the text itself.
Third, many critics believe that psychoanalytic criticism reduces a text to a
collection of sexual and sensual urges, thereby denying the aesthetic quali
ties that are inherent in a literary work and should receive a critic s attention.
Fourth Freud is particularly masculine in his interpretation, asserting the
predominance of the male, giving only a secondary nod to the female. His
theories, critics assert, are sexually unbalanced. Although some may argue
that Freud was a "male product" of his masculine times, it took the work of
Lacan and other present-day psychoanalytic critics to rescue Freud from
his masculine bias. Fifth, some argue that psychoanalysis is too simplistic in
its attempt to understand the human psyche in all its complexities. Such ar
guments, however, can be made for most models of the human psyche
because, after all, they are simply models. And last, many declare that as a
science, psychoanalysis is not objective or scientific. Freud himself was
unshakeable in declaring the scientific validity of his own work, but even he
was concerned about the "narrative" quality of many of his case histories.
That Freud pioneered new avenues of exploration of the human psyche
remains unquestioned. That literary theorists and critics continue to accept,
reject, borrow, or amend his theories and their applications stands as a testa
ment to Freud's continued importance, not only from a historical perspective
but also from a practicing critic's point of view.
F e m in is m
To emancipate woman is to refuse to confine her to the relations she bears to man.
Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex (1949)
INTRODUCTION
n the inaugural edition of one of the earliest American newspapers owned

I and operated by women, the Woman's Chronicle of Little Rock, Arkansas,
Kate Cuningham, the editor, penned and published these words on
Saturday, March 24,1888:
N o o n e is s o w e ll c a lc u la t e d to th in k fo r w o m a n k in d a s w o m a n h e rs e lf. In th e
p ro v in c e o f a d m i n i s t e r i n g to t h e w a n t s o f h e r s e x , n o o n e c a n b e s o w e ll
a d ap ted a s s h e . H e r a d v a n c e m e n t is in n o b e tte r w a y p r o v e n th a n b y h e r p r o g
ress in m e d ic in e a n d lit e r a t u r e , to s a y n o th in g o f th e r e fo rm m o v e m e n ts w h ic h
she is s te a d ily c a r r y in g o n fo r th e b e n e f it o f h e r se x .
More than one hundred years later, another Arkansas woman and the
former first lady of both Arkansas and the United States of America, a U.S.
Senator from New York state, and the secretary of state under the Obama
administration, Hillary Rodham Clinton spoke these words in September
2005 at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, held in
Beijing, China: "It is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as
separate from human rights." That Secretary Clinton voiced these words
mre than a century after Cuningham's newspaper proclamation is in
deed telling. Were not Cuningham's words embraced by Americans in the
atter part of the 1800s? And why need Clinton be assuring women of the
twenty-first century that their rights and the rights of all humanity
males and females alikeare the same? Are not twenty-first-century
143
144 Chapter 7 Feminism
women and men equal in all respects? Feminist studies, feminist the()rU.
and feminist critics all answer in one accord: No! h,
As one of the most significant developments in literary studies in fL
second half of the twentieth century, feminist literary criticism advoca*
equal rights for all women (indeed, all peoples) in all areas of life; socianS
politically, professionally, personally, economically, aesthetically, and ps^'
chologically. Emerging to prominence in the 1960s, feminist criticism is 2 '
strand of feminist studies. Informed by feminist literary theory and schola^
ship, feminist criticism is an umbrella term for a variety of approaches t
culture and literature that are of particular interest to women. Central to th
diverse aims and methods of feminist criticism is its focus on patriarchy, the
rule of society and culture by men. In her 1980 essay titled "Dancing through
the Minefield"one of the first works to articulate the theoretical assump
tions of feminist theory and to survey its methodologyAnnette Kolodny a
feminist critic, articulates feminist criticism's chief tenet:
W h a t u n ite s a n d re p e a te d ly in v ig o ra te s fe m in is t lite r a r y c r itic is m . . . is neither

d o g m a n o r m e th o d b u t a n a c u te a n d im p a s s io n e d a tte n tiv e n e s s to th e w ays in
w h ic h p r im a r ily m a le s tru c tu r e s o f p o w e r a r e in s c r ib e d o r (e n c o d e d ) w ithin
o u r lite ra ry in h e rita n c e [an d ] th e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f th a t e n c o d in g fo r w o m en
a s c h a ra c te rs , a s re a d e rs, a n d a s w rite rs .
These male structures of power embrace phallocentrism, the belief that

identifies the phallus as the source of power in culture and literature, with its
accompanying male-centered and male-dominated patriarchal assumptions.
In her landmark essay "Feminist Literary Criticism" (1986), Toril Moi, profes
sor of English and theater studies at Duke University and a leading feminist
theorist and critic, defines feminist criticism as "a specific kind of political
discourse, a critical and theoretical practice committed to the struggle
against patriarchy and sexism. According to Moi, one of feminist criticism's
chief aims is to challenge and critique this patriarchal vision established in
both culture and literature, denouncing and rejecting all phallocentric as
sumptions. Judith Fetterley, another leading feminist theorist and critic,
agrees with Moi's definition. In the introduction to Fetterley's influential text
The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction (1978), Fetterley
asserts t at eminist criticism is [also] a political act whose aim is not sim-
fr/ irderPre* * e world but to change it by changing the consciousness of
m T W.h * ef andtheir relation to what they read." According to Fetterley,
nv iSt CrtiC is "to become a resisting rather than an assent*
he min Ht y, u \ USal to assent' begin the process of exorcizing
the malt mind that has been implanted in us."
been i m ^ l a ^ ts acc n'panying phallocentric b e l^
canon whose r ,u*s' ,n lar8e P ^ t, in the Western \i& l
e, acclaimed writers, philosophers, and scholars
C h ap ter 7 Fem inism 145
, A brief historical survey of comments made and beliefs held by

rtU>>tly *nale
canonical u_>.. w riters_______
______ lends support to feminist criticism's belief th
^ nonical m that a pa-
VLz>tcrn
ri" cM ViSi n h been estah,i^ d ; n l h7 w " r c w litnrarx, ~
Lrary cano n:
P o not let a w o m a n w ith a s e x y r u m p d e c e iv e

Uvrds; she is after your barn. The man who trustTn
" 'ists a womanwheedlig and coaxing
trusts a deceiver.
Hesiod, poet, eighth century BCE
Plato thanks t h e g o d s f o r tw o b le s s in g s : that h e h n a ,.

he had not been born a woman. a ot been born a slave and that
Plato (c.427-c.347 BCE)
Silence g iv e s the p r o p e r g r a c e to w o m e n .
Sophocles (497-406 BCE)
The male is b y n a t u r e s u p e r io r , a n d th e fe m a le in fe rio r; a n d the o n e ru le s a n d th e

other is ru led . W o m a n "is m a tter, w a itin g to b e fo r m e d by the active m ale p r in c ip le
. . . M a n c o n s e q u e n t ly p la y s a m a jo r p a rt in rep ro d u c tio n ; the w o m an is m e rely
the passive in c u b a to r o f h is s e e d ."
Aristotle (384-322 BCE)
Woman is rea lly a n " im p e rfe c t m a n . . . a n in cid en ta l b e in g . . . a bo tch ed m a le ."
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)
A lth o u gh a w o m a n is a " b e a u t ifu l h a n d iw o rk o f g o d ," s h e do es "n o t e q u a l th e

glory a n d d ig n it y o f th e m a le ."
Martin Luther (1483-1546)
Frailty, thy name is woman.

H am let by Shakespeare (1564-1616)
Most women have no character at all.

Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
Women, women! Cherished and deadly objects that nature has embellished to tor-
ure us. . . whose hatred and love are equally harmful, and whom we cannot either
seek orflee with impunity.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1702 1778)
Alary oiuiomr,,/)isa
W '
W a lp o le , a u u , o f o ^ e a ^ , G ^ c v^
Nlu,r M n M uomm ' be our slum They are our property. . . . What
w<i idea to demand equalityfor women.
N a p o le o n B o n a p a r te ( 1 7 6 9 - ] 8 2 i)
Literature cannot be the business of a woman's life, and b ought not to be. The
more she is engaged in her proper duties, the less leisure will she have for it, nen
any. . . recreation.
R o b e r t S o u th e y , P o e t L a u r e a te (17 7 4 -1 8 4 3 )
Woman is a slave whom we must be clever enough to set upon a throne.
H o n o r e d e B a lz a c (1 7 9 9 -1 8 5 0 )
Jane Austen's novels are "vulgar in tone, sterile in artistic invention . . . without
genius, wit or knowledge of the world. Never was life so pinched and narrow.
R a lp h W a ld o E m e r s o n (1 8 0 3 -1 8 8 2 )
Women writers are a ",damned mob of scribbling women " who only write any
thing worth reading if the devil is in them.
N a th a n ie l H a w th o r n e (18 0 4 -1 8 6 4 )
The woman author does not exist. She is a contradiction in terms. The role of the
woman in letters is the same as in manufacturing; she is of use when genius is no
longer required.
P ie r r e -Jo s e p h P r o u d h o n (18 0 9 -1 8 6 5 )
Woman is natural, that is, abominable.
C h a r le s -P ie r r e B a u d e la ir e (1 8 21-18 6 7 )
Mark Twain (1835-1910)
where behind f^ Z r T g ^ e a lty ^ ' ' ' WUh a greedy littk m0UtH^
F r ie d r ic h N ie tz s c h e ( 18 4 4 - 190^)
C hapter 7 Ivm lrm m 147
artist'* m ost essential quality i s * m a $ t e ,
and esfk\ uilhf m arks oft m en fm , 'V execution . .
K " - '' T he m ate q u a il,p is
feminism is o political mistake. Feminism V , l " | ,k ln s d a w - I W W )

* to instinctwill iz
recogn *y wom
V a le n tin e d e S a in t- P o in t ( 1 8 7 5 - 1 9 5 3 )
Educating a woman is like pouring honey over a fine Swiss watch. It stops working.
K u r t V o n n e g u t, Jr. ( 1 9 2 2 - 2 0 0 7 )
F e m in is t lit e r a r y c r it ic is m c h a lle n g e s s u c h p a tr ia r c h a l s ta te m e n ts w ith

th e ir a c c o m p a n y i n g m a l e - d o m i n a t e d , p h i l o s o p h i c a l a s s u m p t i o n s a n d s u c h
g e n d e r - b ia s e d c r i t i c i s m . A s s e r t i n g t h a t l i t e r a t u r e s h o u l d b e f r e e f r o m b i a s e s o f
race, c la s s , o r g e n d e r , f e m i n i s t c r i t i c i s m p r o v i d e s a v a r i e t y o f t h e o r e t i c a l f r a m e
w o rk s a n d a p p r o a c h e s t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t v a l u e s e a c h m e m b e r o f s o c i e t y .
h is t o r ic a l d e v e l o p m e n t
A c c o r d in g t o f e m i n i s t c r i t i c i s m , t h e r o o t s o f p r e j u d i c e a g a i n s t w o m e n h a v e
lo n g b e e n e m b e d d e d i n W e s t e r n c u l t u r e . T h e a n c i e n t G r e e k s a b e t t e d g e n d e r
d is c r im in a t io n , d e c l a r i n g t h e m a l e t o b e t h e s u p e r i o r a n d t h e f e m a l e t h e i n f e
rior. W o m e n , t h e y m a i n t a i n e d , l u r e m e n a w a y f r o m s e e k i n g t r u t h , p r e v e n t
in g t h e m f r o m a t t a i n i n g t h e i r f u l l p o t e n t i a l . I n t h e c e n t u r i e s t h a t f o l l o w , o t h e r
p h i lo s o p h e r s a n d s c i e n t i s t s c o n t i n u e s u c h g e n d e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . F o r e x a m
p le , in The Descent o f Man (1 8 7 1 ), C h a r le s D a r w in (1 8 0 9 -1 8 8 2 ) a n n o u n c e s th a t
w om en a re a " c h a r a c te r is tic o f . . . a p a s t a n d lo w e r s ta te o f c iv iliz a t io n ."
S u ch b e i n g s , h e n o t e s , a r e i n f e r i o r t o m e n , w h o a r e p h y s i c a l l y , i n t e l l e c t u a l l y ,
and a r tis tic a lly s u p e r i o r .
C e n tu ry a fte r c e n tu r y , m a le v o ic e s c o n t in u e to a r tic u la te a n d d e te r m in e
th e s o c ia l r o l e a n d c u l t u r a l a n d p e r s o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f w o m e n . S o m e s c h o l a r s
b e lie v e t h a t t h e f i r s t m a j o r w o r k o f f e m i n i s t c r i t i c i s m c h a l l e n g i n g t h e s e m a l e
v o ic e s w a s t h a t a u t h o r e d b y C h r i s t i n e d e P i z a n (1365-C.1434) in t h e f o u r t e e n t h
ce n tu ry , L'Epistre au Dieu d'amours (1399). In th is w o r k , P iz a n c r itiq u e s Je a n d e
Roman de la
M e u n 's b i a s e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e n a t u r e o f w o m a n i n h i s t e x t
Rose (c.1230; c . 1 2 7 5 ) . In a n o th e r w o rk , he Livre de la Cite des Dames (1405), P i z a n
d e c la re s t h a t G o d c r e a t e d b o t h m a n a n d w o m a n a s e q u a l b e i n g s .
T h ro u g h o u t th e f o llo w in g c e n t u r ie s , o th e r fe m a le v o ic e s a r tic u la te d th e
rig h t o f w o m e n t o b e h e a r d a n d a c k n o w l e d g e d a s s c h o l a r s , a r t i s t s , a n d w r i t
ers. O n e s u c h v o i c e w a s t h a t o f A p h r a B e h n ( 1 6 4 0 - 1 6 8 9 ) in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h
c e n tu r y . B e h n , o f t e n a c c r e d ite d a s th e fir s t E n g lis h p r o fe s s io n a l fe m a le
writer, was one of the most prolific dramatists, poets, and nov r
Restoration, authoring works that highlight the amatory fiction of r Of U\
erature. According to the twentieth-century feminist Virginja
women together, ought to let flowers fall upon the grave of Aphr lf' "All
for it was she who earned them the right to speak their minds " i ?
writers of her time, Behn used her fiction to bring to the forefr ** lê
lyze women's sexual desires directed toward both males a h ^ arâ-
Innovative in the use of such narrative techniques as voice, visual êrnaks
frankness of subject matter, Behn published dramas (The Amor CU6S' and
1671), poetry (On Desire, 1688), and novels (Oroonoko, 1688) that hiMS ^r'nce,
the way for the British Romantic movement. Today her words 6 ^ pave
tural studies scholars and many others with an abundance of text Cul-
tinizp what it means to be human. S â*scru-
In the late 1700s, another powerful, artistic female voice arose in opposi
tion to the continued patriarchal beliefs and statements housed in society
and the Western canon. Influenced by the French revolution and believing
that women along with men should have a voice in the public arena, Mary
Wollstonecraft (1759-1797) authored A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
(1792), the first major published work that acknowledges an awareness of
women's struggles for equal rights. Women, she maintains, must define for
themselves what it means to be a woman. Women themselves must take the
lead and articulate who they are and what role they will play in society by
rejecting the patriarchal assumption that women are inferior to men.
It was not until the Progressive Era of the early 1900s, however, that
major concerns of feminist criticism took root in literature and criticism.
During this time, women gained the right to vote and became prominent ac
tivists in the social issues of the day, such as health care, education, politics,
and literature, but equality with men in these arenas still remained outside
their grasp.
Virginia Woolf
day kmiMstMa7 Wollst n e c r a f t t IdeW If <

this text Wool7dec|Sm Her POWerful work a" ! ^ f undation forPresen'-
inferior r (S ^ men have Seated f e'S (,929)' In
Sam t| ttn | 0 ,t^ ai' economic/ socia]61 V i be female a"d determine who
that great mi T e' one f the forerrm't .1,erary structures. Agreeing with
pothesires th " S.Possess both male a a " lne(eenth-century literary critics,
a female characteristics, Woolf in
vents her from h Speare himself Shat S Slster' one who is equally as gf|f
m having -'a room ofhh t Speare's sister's sex, however, pr*
f h e r ^ n . " B e ca u se sh e is fem ale, she
Chapter 7 Feminism 149
cannot obtain an education or find p r o f i t s
cannofeconomically afford a room of Z r eirxP ^ y m etx t AnH
never flourish. Being able to afford her OWn' her innate ar^H beâuse she
d e and autonomy needed to l | urt" W" "*>"> ^ wil1
Such a loss of artistic talent and person .

suit o W s o p m i o n of women: t ^ ^ rth' ar8 Woolf, is the ie-
men. Women, Woolf declares, must txn,nteUect^H
and estabhsh and define for th em seh S t h e fi^ p T * * f female" *
must challenge the prevailing, false cultural n o t i l , 1 ? ' T do *>' ^ e y
and develop a female discourse that will Z about theirssexual identity
sh,p 'to the world of reality and not to the w^rW / * * * ? * their ^ t i o n -
this challenge, Woolf believes that Shakespeare s s is tZ ' Z Women acceP
and through women living today, even t h . V6'
dishes and putting the children to b e d ~ ^ y ** wash*"g up the
calamities such as the Great Depression of io->W' Societal and world
1940s however, changed ,he Z Z o 7 h u n ^ W dd * in .he
the advancement of these feminist ideals. * attentin and delayed
Simone de Beauvoir
After World War II and the 1^44 publication of Second Sex by the French
writer Simone de Beauvoir (190&-1986), feminist concerns once again are
heard. Heralded as the foundational work of twentieth-century feminism,
Beauvoir's text asserts that French society (and Western societies in general)
are patriarchal, controlled by males. Like Woolf before her, Beauvoir be
lieves that the male defines what it means to be human, including what it
means to be female. Since the female is not male, Beauvoir maintains she be
comes the Other, an object whose existence is defined and interpreted by e
dominant male. Being subordinate to the male, the fema e iscovers a s e
is a secondary or nonexistent player in the major socia ins i u
culture, such as the church, government, and educationa s> ^
believes that women must break .he bonds of .he., paârchal soc.ety and
define themselves if they wish to become a sigmftcant buman t^rng m th
own right, and .hey must defy - ' o ^ th "
must ask themselves, "What is a woman ain ailows males to
answer must not be "mankind, for such a term 8 ^ such labehng
define women. Beauvoir rejects this RCTenclabe . * ^ ^ herse|f but
assumes that "humanity is male and man defines
as relative to him."
, . wo,m.n must sue themselves as autonomy
Beauvoir insis s st reject the societal construct that mU*
ings. Women, she i ' wmen are the Other. Embedded in th!* ar*
the * * < * - . " r " * : : , , . , , males have the power to
.^ s t a m n w o t t s t h e ^ u ^ t ^ (<) >
h:J ^ y
S ; : - must define themselves articulate their own
S t r u c t * of what it means to be a woman, and reject betng labeled as
Kate Millett
With the advent of the 1960s and with its political activism and social con
cerns, feminist issues found new voices, such as Mary Ellmann {Thinking
about Women, 1968) and Kate Millett. With Millett s publication of Sexual
Politics in 1970, a new wave of feminism begins. Millett is one of the first to
challenge the ideological characteristics of both the male and the female. She
asserts that a female is bom but a woman is created. In other words, one's sex
is determined at birth, but one's gender is a social construct created by cul
tural norms. Consciously or unconsciously, women and men conform to the
societal constructs established by society. Boys, for example, should be ag
gressive, self-assertive, and domineering, whereas girls should be passive,
meek, and humble. Such cultural expectations are transmitted through media,
including television, movies, songs, and literature. Conforming to these
prescribed sex roles dictated by society is what Millett calls sexual politics, or
the operations of power relations in society. In the West institutional power
rests with males, forcing the subordination of women. Women, Millett main
tains, must disenfranchise the power center of their culture: male dominance.
By so doing, women will be able to establish female social conventions as de
fined by females, not males, and in the process, they themselves will shape
and articulate female discourse, literary studies, and feminist theory.
FEMINISM IN THE 1960s, '70s, and '80s
In 1963 two works helped bring feminist concerns once again into the publ
arena: American Women, edited by Frances Bagley Kaplan and Margar
ead, and The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan. American Women w,
Cnm m mmatin^ i^01^ two years of in v e s tig a tio n by th e P resid e0 *
~ * r n u |t3tUS f W om on ' c o m m is s io n e d by P resid en t John
the w orkplace 1 CtailS inc(ll,nlity between men and women
^ reat
evidence of their ^ in socioty as a whole. Armed w ith v e r if y
inequality w o m en asserted p o litic a l p re ssu re in C o n g *
Chapter 7 Feminism 15 1
U Friedan (1921-2006), published

lated two central questions, of feminist criticism thatL , n became popular
"A woman has got to be able to say, and not (eel guilty, Who I, and What
4C1want out ofhfe? She imrstn t feel selfish and neurotic if she wants goals of
her own, outs.de of husband and children." By 1966, Friedan was elected
president of the newly formed National Organization for Women (NOW)
whose platform argued for equal opportunity for women "under the law,"
including educational and employment reforms; the right of choice concern
ing abortion, and a host of other social, political, and personal issues.
During this time and throughout the 1970s, feminist theorists and critics
began to examine the traditional literary canon, discovering copious exam
ples of male dominance and prejudice that supported Beauvoir's and
Millett's assertion that males consider the female "the Other." Stereotypes of
women abounded in the canon: Women were sex maniacs, goddesses of
beauty, mindless entities, or old spinsters. In addition, although Charles
Dickens, William Wordsworth, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry David
Thoreau, Mark Twain, and many other male authors found their way into
the established canon, few female authors achieved such status. Those who
did appear, such as Mary E. Wilkins Freeman or Sarah Orne Jewett, were re
ferred to as "local color writers," implying their secondary or minor position
in the canon. Similarly, the roles of female, fictionalized characters were
often limited to minor characters whose chief traits reinforced the male's
stereotypical image of women. Female theorists, critics, and scholars such as
Woolf and de Beauvoir were simply ignored, their writings seldom, if ever,
referred to by the male crafters of the literary canon.
Feminist theorists and critics of this era declared that male authors who
created and enjoyed such a place of prominence within the canon had as
sumed that their ideal readers were all males. Women reading such works
could easily be duped into reading as a man reads. In addition, because most
of the university professors were men, more frequently than not female stu
dents were being trained to read literature as if they, too, were men. Hence,
the feminists critics of the 1960s, '70s, and '80s announced the existence of a
female ideal reader who was affronted by the male prejudices abounding m
the canon. Questions now arose concerning the male and female qualities o
literary form, style, voice, theme, and other aesthetic elements o texts.
Throughout the 1970s, books that defined women's writings in feminine
terms flourished. Having successfully highlighted the importance of gender
feminist theorists uncovered and rediscovered a body of works auftored y
females that their male counterparts had decreed mfenor and
be par, of the canon. In America, for example, Kate Choptn s a
eentury novel The Awakening (1899) as * [ J jX ' 's The Golden
erninist text of this period, whereas in Engla
Chapter 7 Feminism
152
.f. K* ( 1 in ^r\V,T,nUvers!tit-s'!'.'dîi< the reading p o p u ^ '^ 'i
by women. Simulwiwcn y. literary history, ami to articulaiA ,a'

tion. to categorize and p b m f c j ,L,nlinist cri,ics. * *
male aesthetic became t rtecj jn print by the establishment of
Feminist c " S s T u c h a s V V Sinches % *
Feminist 1 mss m l ) such as Annette Kolodny's THp i ^
and Feminist SI,ate, to name a e w mOTaI u f e Z u , f i
E,y 'in Fcmmisl Criticfem (1977); Judith Fetterley s The Rcscstmg Reader:
Feminist Approachto A m e r i c a n F . c t i o n (1978); Nma,
Guide to Novels by and about Women in America, 1820> 1870 (1978); Sandra M.
Gilbert and Susan Gubar's edited work Shakespeare s Sisters. Feminist Essays
on Women Poets (1979); and Gilbert and Gubar s The Madwoman in the Attic:
The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-century Literary Imagination (1979)
helped shape the ongoing concerns and direction of feminist theory and crit
icism, providing public venues for these discussions.
Elaine Showalter
A leading voice of feminist criticism throughout the late 1970s and through
the next several decades is that of Elaine Showalter. In A Literature of Their
Own: British Women Novelists from Bronte to Lessing (1977), Showalter chroni
cles three historical phases of female writing: the fe m in in e phase
(1840-1880), the fem inist phase (1880-1920), and the fem ale phase
(1920-present). During the "feminine" phase, writers such as Charlotte
Bronte, George Eliot, and George Sand accepted the prevailing social con
structs that defined women. Accordingly, these authors wrote under male
pseudonyms so their works, like their male counterparts', would first be pub
lished and recognized for their intellectual and artistic achievements. During
the feminist or second phase, female writers helped dramatize the plight of
the slighted" woman, depicting the harsh and often cruel treatment of fe
male characters ^ the hands of their more powerful male creations. In the
ronsfrurfr1713 6 -P emaê wr*ters have rejected both the feminine social
minor posihlT'oHem phaSe and the seconda^ 01
Showalter characters that dominated the "feminist" phase
selves with developing a pf lferlyfT*? a" d Critics Presently concern them-
rience in art including fe le understanding of the female expe-
Such a task necessarily includ^m analysis of hterary forms and techniques
Showalter uses to describe theâle haTred^fw ^ miS 8yny in tGXtS' 3 * * *
sh w a lle r M ,e v e S th a t fe m a le w rite rs w ere H , u
the lib ra ry ca n o n b y m a le p ro fe s s o rs w h o f , erate,y exclu d ed from
Vriters su ch as S u san W a rn e r (7%e W
W * b,i$hed
^ u th w o rth (The Hidden Hand, 18 5 9 ), an d m ! ^ W ,^ * * N
[n g n d N un and O t h e r S t o r ie s , 1891; f t miTOf e Fr n M iVete
authors o f th e s e co n d h a lf o f th e n in eteen th ce n t, b y m o s ( Popul a r
* not d eem ed w o rth y to be in clu d ed in the e a ^ e" A m eri n fiction ,
Showalter, m u st ce a se . In h e r influential essav 4 Such ex clu sion, says
(1997), S h o w alter a s s e rts th a t fem in ist th eorist* ^ 3 Fem ,nis' P o e tics"
framework for an aly sis o f w o m e n 's literatu re to h ?* * a fem ale
on the study o f fem ale exp erien ce, ra th e r than t4 P n ew m o d e s b a sed
theories," a p ro c e s s s h e n a m e s g y n o c ritic is m r f t0 m a,e m o d els and
Showalter e x p o s e s th e false c u ltu ra l a s s u m o l 7 h g y n o criticism ,
women as d e p icte d in c a n o n ica l lite ra tu re Sh , ch a ra cte ristics o f
gynocritics a classification sh e g iv es to tho* W aIter coins the w ord
L i e fram ew ork for the an alysis o f w o m e n s hcs Who " ^ s t r u c t a fe
els based on the s tu d y o f fem ale exp erien ce 4 4 4 7 deveJoP n ew m od -
models and th eo ries." G yn ocritics a n d ev n o rrin v ^ ^ f adaP f to m a le
models that ad dress the n atu re o f w om en 's w rit' ^ P rovide us with fou r
guistic, the p sych oan alytic, and the cultural 8 ' the bloloS ical the lin-
Each o f S h o w aIter's m o d els is sequential * h c
the preceding m odel o r m odels. The b iological f nd d ev eIP>ng
female body m ark s itself on a te x t bv Dm !iH m ode] emphasizes h ow the
along with a personal, intimate ton ^ f t ! h St f Jiterary ^ ^ g es
nd for a female discourse, inves.feaU nJ m . H ,',' m del >ddre <* 'he
women and men use lan g u a4.T h fs m o d 7 f b e t w e e n how
write in a language d i s t i n c t to their gender and^ri? ** * 7 " Create and
this female language can be used In ih d t h e ways in which
model analyzes thefema7e psyche and de " T ! 1" 88; The

the writing process, e K ^ f e m g
mS as o p p o s e d to m a l e w r i t i n g L h i ux a d flu i d i t y o f f e m a l e w rit-
Showalter's models, the cultural L o d i T ^ ^ structure- The la s t o f
women's goals, responses, and points of view ^ h0,V C M y shaPes
Geographical Strains of Feminism

During the 1960s, '70s, and '80s, no one critical theory of writing dominated
emirust criticism because feminist theory and criticism highlighted the per
sonal, allowing for diverse theories and approaches to textual analysis,
istorically, geography played a significant role in determining the major in-
^ ts of the various voices of feminist criticism, with three somewhat distinct,
^graphical strains of feminism having emerged: American, British, and
rench. These geographical divisions no longer serve as distinct theoretical
or practical boundaries but do remain important as historical m arker

inism's development. According to Showalter, A m erican feminis n W
time was essentially textual, stressing repression o f texts authored by f *1 K
British feminism was essentially Marxist, stressing oppression; and
feminism was essentially psychoanalytic, stressing repression. The ain/^1^
groups was similar: to rescue women from being considered "the Other
American For American feminism, Kolodny announced feminism's

i: the restoration and inclusion o f the writings o f female writer ma,0r
concern: a *0 the
literary canon. Believing that literary history is itself a fiction, Kolodny re-
r e a l i s t i c history of women so that they themselves can tell
s ! r in order to tell and write herstory, female writers must find a mean*
to gain their voice in the midst of the dominating male voices seeking
society's attention. hr The Lay oflhe Und: Metaphor as Expertence and History;*
American Life and Utters (1975) and The U nd before Her: Fantasy ani
Experience of the American Frontiers, 1630-1860 (1984), Kolodny uses feminist-
psychoanalytic theories and methodologies to assert that the American col
onists attributed to the land feminine characteristics to soften and allay their
fears concerning the lands unknown but potential terrors. Whereas some
males viewed the American frontier as a new Eden, female colonists often
saw it as a home and a "familial human community. In a later work, Failing
the Future: A Dean Looks at Higher Education in the Twenty-first Century (1998),
Kolodny provides evidence that women are still outsiders' at American
universities and on college campuses. She also documents the rising an
tifeminist and anti-intellectual harassment occurring against women in
higher education.
Similar to Kolodny, Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar, authors of The
Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-century Literary
Imagination (1979), declare that the male voice has, for too long, been domi
nant. Because males have had the power of the pen and the press, they have
been allowed not only to define but also to create images of women as they
so chose in their texts. Gilbert and Gubar maintain that this male power has
caused what they call "anxiety of authorship" in women, causing them to
fear both the act of literary creation itself and writing. Some female writers
believe that literary creation will isolate them from society, perhaps destroy
ing therm Gilbert and Gubar's solution is that women develop a "woman's
sentence" that can encourage literary autonomy. By inventing such a con
struction, a woman can sentence male authors to isolation, to fear, and to
sen ten cin g n T the canon' Just as for centuries males have been
Gubar fem alp ^ T ^ cumulating a woman's sentence, say Gilbert an
A w Z r r W,n free ,hemselves from being defined by men.
being reduced I T T ' argUe GUbert and Gubar, will also free women
tify two such puncim l' 1* ^ '0"1' ima8es 'bat appear in literature. They i e
principal .mage* "the angel in the house" and the "madwom^
attic." When depicted as t h e angel in ,u em,ni,m
th? s that her physical a n d m a t e r ia l CnnJ b e h Use>a Wom.
litre
l r goals in life are to please her hush;, 7^rts aa- g,f(s f " suPP<*ed|y
& W Through these s u p p o r t , *
v e n t by serving both him and her c h ild ! * * * ' sh<' fin d s 1 *** hu^
' '" ^ a<*
characters rejectsuch a role, male criticg d S h When 3
inthe attic who is also "obviously" xes ^ 3 "mnster "
a
u
Gilbert and Gubar assert that ehh X 3,lea * mad*<>man
madwomanare unrealistic r e n m ^ Z ! - * t b e s e i m a e e s n ,
image canonizes the female, p l a c i n e h Z ' n S * w m e n in sori ! n
her socially constructed world, w h L th S'mu,taneously a b w e V * 16 fifst
monizes the female, banishing her to th SeC nd Utside
dir r a r g w M p Z i t1 e - - m yV r i c / " d
sage is clear: If you are not an angel th ^ T erature and societv ^
typical, m a le - c r e a t e d i m a g e s o f i m!
C
you are a monster ? ^ mes
Gubar, must be uncovered exam in .m, n ln Jl ferature dec/* ^ eSe stere-
7
- * * ry a u , t 0 *
B ritish Whereas American feminism emphasized repression, British femi
nismstressed oppression. Leaning toward Marxist theory, British feminism
sawart, literature, and life as inseparable. Some British feminists, although
not all, viewed reading, writing, and publishing as facets of material reality.
Being part of this material reality, literature, like one's job and one's social ac
tivities, is part of a great whole, with each part affecting the others. How a fe
male is depicted in literature directly affects how women will be treated in
real life. Particularly in the West, patriarchal society exploits women not only
through literature but also economically and socially. The traditional
Western family structure, assert these feminist critics, subordinates women,
causing them to be economically dependent. The West's literature reflects
such dependency. British feminism of this era challenges the economic and
social status of women, both in society and as depicted in the arts, especially
in texts. For these critics, the goal of feminist criticism is to change society,
not simply critique it.
French French feminism, the third geographical division of feminism,

stressed female oppression both in life and art, highlighting the repression of
wmen. French feminism is closely associated with the theoretical and prac
tical applications of psychoanalysis and the theories of Sigmund Freud and
deques Lacan. At first, the association with psychoanalysis may be a bit
Puzzling because Freud and his patriarchal theories seemingly dominate
Psychoanalysis. Believing that the phallus is power, Freud viewed women
ar>d'n^m^ ete maês who possess penis envy, desiring to gain the male phallus
Lacabtain Pwer. In several ways, the French psychoanalytic critic Jacques
3n rescues psychoanalysis from Freud's misogynistic theories. Lacan
argues that language ultimately shapes and structures our conscious and
conscious minds, thereby shaping our self-identity, not the phal,
Language as it is structured and understood, Lacan maintains, ultimat
denies women the power of literature and writing. y
Lacan posits that the human psyche consists of three parte, or what ^
calls orders: the imaginary, the symbolic, and the real. Each of these or(jer
interacts with the others. From birth to six months or so, we primarily fUnc
tion in the imaginary order, a preverbal state that contains our wishes, 0Ur
fantasies, and our physical images. In this state we are basically genderless
because we are not yet capable of differentiating ourselves from our moth-
ers. As soon as we have successfully navigated the Oedipal crisis, we pass
from using a biological language to a socialized language and into the sec
ond of the Lacanian orders: the symbolic order. In this Lacanian phase, the
male becomes dominant, particularly in the discourse of language. The fe
male, on the other hand, is socialized into using a subordinated language. In
this order, the father is the dominant image (the Law), with both the male
and the female fearing castration by the father. For the boy, this fear of cas
tration means obeying and becoming like the father, while simultaneously
repressing the imaginary order that is most closely associated with the fe
male body. The imaginary order, with its pre-Oedipal boy desires, becomes a
direct threat to the male in the third Lacanian order, the real order, or the ac
tual world as perceived by the individual. For the girl, entrance into the sym
bolic order means submission to law of the father. Such submission brings
subservience to males. Being socialized through the discourse of language,
the girl becomes a second-class citizen. Because language, for Lacan, is a psy
chological, not a biological, construct, he believes that women can learn the
dominant discourse of both the symbolic and the real orders and become
tools of social, political, and personal change.
French feminists such as Julia Kristeva and Helene Cixous borrow and
amend elements of Freud's and Lacan's theories to develop their own forms
of feminist criticism. In works such as Revolution in Poetic Language (1974),
Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art (1980), and Powers
of Horror: An Essay on Abjection (European Perspectives) (1982), Kristeva posits
that the imaginary order is characterized by a continuous flow of fluidity or
r ythm, which she calls chora. On entering the Lacanian symbolic order,
both males and females are separated from chora and repress the feelings of
. , U1 \ S*m*lar to a Freudian slip in which an unconscious
th: : i h b;, et thrgh the conscious mind, the chora, at times, breaks
inTam!1 * " k ^ 3nd dis,Urbs the male-dominant discount And
T s inf > 2 , as '>o f Love (1987),Kristeva's concept of "mother-
to be the central thn writin8 because she asks what she beiieveS
enquiry into the Cmplex question of feminist theory: "How can an
the part played in lovebv j therhood lcad to a better understanding n
P yed in love by the woman?" Kristeva argues that women mns<
mutually "di-iil" wilh men, another w hj| U f ?
e\
M- n-jivlinn or acceptance of motherh, Perl,,,,
tin Cixous explore-s a different mode ^ >men? * Child' '< " will
symbolic ord er. C ix o u s m ain tain s t h n , d Sc<>Ure th<it a ri
line," "fem in inity," an d ev e n " m a n " ! > Su^ as ^ ^ a n 's
language. In w o rk s su ch as th e "L aim h ^ Wrnan " should h ' n,ne'" " mascu-
dares that there exists a particular k i n d e r ^ Mt?du sa"( 1 9 7 ^ ^ frorn
feminine, en visio n ed in term s o f h; 1 f in a le writing lu '' t,X o u s de-
understood, C ix o u s a s s e rts a s 'U e ld 1' 8! ^
would be genital, assembling evervIh J harm<>"y, r e a S b" T " b * * *
spending." This kind of f e i t ? , " 8 and being capabt f y few' whicb
limited to written words but also "w v 1S the Province o f
fluidity, such feminine discourse * * the voice* c Z l T '* *
transform the social and cultural smuctums ^ b h T 1!1" ^ ' CixouT i m
women and men from phallocentrism. h,n l,,eratu by freeingbolh
PR ESEN T-D A Y F E M IN IS T C R IT IC IS M S
Because contemporary feminist criticism is not composed of a single ideol

ogy, many subcategories or approaches have developed, each creating its
own sphere of concern while often intersecting not only with other forms of
feminist criticism but also with other schools of literary criticism, such as
psychoanalysis, Marxism, and deconstruction. Some scholars categorize
feminist criticism into four groups: Anglo-American feminisms (e.g.,
Virginia Woolf, Judith Fetterley, Annette Kolodny, Nina Baym, Elaine
Showalter, Sandra Gilbert, and Susan Gubar); poststructuralist feminisms
(e.g., Luce Irigaray, Catherine Clement, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak,
Monique Wittig, Helene Cixous, Julia Kristeva, and Joan Scott); materialist
feminisms (e.g., Juliet Mitchell, Michele Barrett, Jacqueline Rose, Rosalind
Coward, Toril Moi, Catherine Belsey, Katie King, and Donna Haraway); and
postmodern fem inism s, usually dating from 1990 to the present (e.g., Jane
Gallop, Judith Butler, Diana Fuss, Chandra Mohanty, Uma Narayan, Mary
Daly, and Gloria Anzaldua). f cllural.(nTor;es
Other critics divide feminist E lu d in g Amazon femi-
ranging in number from nine to more feminism, separatism, and
nism, cultural feminism, ecofemimsm, Cfpminism is dedicated to fe-
postcolonial feminism, to cite a few A m a z e , a h , emphaSize
male imageseither fictional or real both males and fe-
the physiques of female athletes and physica eq women based on
males Opposed to gender roles and discrimmatum against ^ Amazon
the false assumptions that females are p ysica y for example, when
feminism argues that no mention of gender need arise,
discussing such topics as occupations. Whereas some people are not p W

caHy capable of being a firefighter, others are likewise not capable of
a snowplow. Gender is not an issue because there are no characteristics,^
assert, that are peculiarly masculine or feminine. y
Sometimes referred to as radical feminism cultural feminism assert*
that personality and biological differences exist between men and w0men
According to cultural feminists such as Elizabeth Gould Davis (The First Ser
1971), the main tenet of cultural feminism states that women are inherent^
and biologically "kinder and gentler" than men. Such women's ways should
be celebrated because in the eyes of many cultural feminists, women's Ways
are better than men's.
Ecofeminism (sometimes spelled eco-feminism) assumes that patriar
chal societies are relatively new and that society s original condition
(dubbed the feminist Eden) was matriarchal. Patriarchal societies, say
ecofeminists, are detrimental to women, children, and nature. Whereas a pa
triarchal society dominates both women and nature, plundering and de
stroying our planet, a matriarchal society protects the environment, natural
resources, and animal life and especially cares for women and children.
Authored by Dolores Hayden, The Grand Domestic Revolution: A History of
Feminist Designs for American Homes (1981) highlights the concerns of material
feminism. Developing in the latter part of the nineteenth century,---- *
feminism aims to improve the material condition of women by unburdening
them of "traditional" female tasks such as housework, cooking, ironing
clothes, and other domestic responsibilities. Separatist feminism, however,
advocates separation from men, either total or partial. Although some sepa
ratists may be lesbians, it is inaccurate to assume that all separatists are les
bians. Separatists assume that women must first see themselves in a different
contextseparating themselves from men, at least for a whilebefore they
can discover who they are as individuals. Such a separation, they maintain, is
the necessary first step to achieving personal growth and individuality.
Sometimes known as third-world feminism, postcolonial feminism
shares many of its basic principles with postcolonialism (see Chapter 10).
Like postcolonialism, postcolonial feminism rejects the phallocentric, patri
archal system established by white males and recognizes that it is engaged in
a political and social struggle against male dominance. These theorists and
critics liken women to colonized subjects who are defined by the "male
gaze" and are thus reduced to stereotypes and subjected to the long-lasting
social and economic effects of colonialism. In particular, postcolonial femi
nists object to using the term woman, believing that such usage defines fe
males by only their sex.
and theory feminist critics may espoi
3t s u b c a te g ry
a a 3 * ey are on a journey of self-discovery that will lead then
Seeking toînH^1) themselves' their society, and the world at la]
Seeking to understand themselves first as individuals, they believe that t
^ p t e r 7 . Fninism m
will then be equipped to develop their own indu, - 1 ,
ricipate in all aspects of their culture, including the f ta,Cnto dnd fullVPar*
a s s u m p t io n s
To onlookers, feminist theory and practice aone^r u

connected body of criticism that is more dividldthan
internal disagreements than to unity among its adherents. FemmlTcntSm
cannot claim nor indeed wants to claim anv ultim o remin,st cr,t,asm
feminists believe in the personal and advoLe for manyd d S l ^ t o
be heard and respected Not to be understood as homogeneous, feminTsUrih
icism should, in actuality, be dubbed feminist criticisms. Behind all these
voices, theories, and practices, however, rests an essential set of principles
The core belief of feminist theory and criticism asserts that all people-
women and men are politically, socially, and economically equal. Although
diverse in its social theories, values, and politics, feminist criticism chiefly
advocates for the rights of women. Its adherents are women (and some men)
who are involved in a journey of self-discovery, asking themselves such
questions as who they are, how they arrived at their present situation, and
where they are going. In their search, they value the person, validating and
giving significance to the individual as opposed to the group. Their search at
times is political because their aim is to discover and change both themselves
and the world in which they live, a world that must learn to validate all in
dividuals, all cultures, and all subcultures as creative, aesthetic, and rational
people who can contribute to their societies and their world. Such a revision
ist stance seeks to understand the place of women in society and to analyze
every aspect that affects women as citizens and as writers in a male-dominated
world. In this patriarchal world, man more frequently than not defines what
it means to be human. Woman has become the Other, the not-male. Man is
the subject, the one who defines meaning. Woman is the object, having her
existence defined and determined by the male. The man is the significant (or
privileged, using Derrida's term) binary in the male/female relationship
whereas the woman is the subordinate (or unprivileged).
By defining the female in relation to the male and claiming; s,mu tane-
ously the superiority of the male, Western society and many other cultures
are, for the most part, patriarchal, decreeing that the ema e, y na
inferior. As soon as Western culture both conscious y 1 at j|
similated this belief into its social structures and alowed . . o permeate all
levels of society, females became an oppressed people, infen
suppressed lest humankind fail to reach its maximum P ^ Df
. Feminist theorists and critics want to correct ch ^ o u j w a j . -o
thinking. Women, they declare, are individuals, peop
^ ChM'tor 7 , l> snite how frequently \\teratu
...........
S ^ r : : % 5 3 ,,wir osp ' and -
^ To Jo so, soy tLl qAat has shaf t the long-held patriarchal as-
t iblished literary cam st also con _ t marshal a variety of re
ared suôn*'na*'OIu an their beliefs and values,
sumptions about thei finally 1" 1 ? 1 Uterature in all disciplines, by
Z Z *o
Through a
f xa.n''" ne whatthe ^ e a n St d criticisms,
it m . woman' and by es,ab
women canUsecure
sh m 8
defining and a ' êrary theor'fR e s p o n s e s to any text; to their own
and creating femm ' itinlatizmg * * d V osilions in then culture,
autonomy an? J ^ u i a l , economrc, and
writing; and to their p
METHODOLOGY
Because feminist theory and criticisms are polyphonic, a variety of feminist

approaches to textual analysis exists. Some feminist critics debunk male su
periority by exposing stereotypes of women in all literary periods. Women,
they assert, cannot be simply depicted and classified as either angels or
demons, saints or whores, or brainless housewives or eccentric spinsters.
Such bipolar characterizations must be continually identified and challenged.
Other feminist critics continue to scrutinize the American, the English, or
the non-Westem literary canon, rediscovering works written by women. Still
other feminist critics reread the canonical works of male authors from a fe
male point of view. Such an analysis develops a uniquely female conscious
ness based on female experience rather than relying on the traditional male
theories of reading, writing, and critiquing. Elaine Showalter's gynocriticism
with its multifaceted approach helps feminist critics in such an analysis.
Some feminist critics such as Luce Irigaray use the methodologies of phi
losophy and psychoanalysis to overturn patriarchy with its accompanying
phallocentrism. These critics' aim is to expose the multiple ways that patri
archal discourses empower males while disenfranchising women. And crit
ics such as Julia Kristeva and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak employ the
methodologies of linguistics, Marxism, deconstruction, and subaltern stud
ies to overturn and to provide an alternative for patriarchal discourse.
In similar fashion, critics such as Monique Wittig and Helene Cixous
propose a completely new, nonphallocentric discourse. Wittig challenges not
only patriarchal assumptions in culture but also the very structure of language
Jt^df experimenting and hoping to eliminate pronouns and nouns, for exam
ple, that reflect gender, a process she calls the lesbianization of language-
Cixous feminist methodology embraces the creation of a female language
, nittitte, to open phallocentric discourse to both sexes. Providing
* y.allenge the dominant discourse is also a chief concern for both
jpodefcto C1 feminists and wom en of color feminists.
.tcoloma varjous approaches to feminist criticisms, an in-depth under-
* To ^ ^ various theoretical positions and methodologies is es-
standif>? ^ fo rtu n a te ly such a study is beyond the scope of this text.
gCtitial-butU
QUESTIONS f o r a n a l y s i s
Whatever method of feminist criticisms we choose to apply to a text we can

begin such textual analysis by asking the following questions as ttey relate
to Nathaniel Hawthorne s short story "Young Goodman Brown " Be ore-
pared to discuss your answers in class. F
Is the author male or female?

Is the text narrated by a male or female?
What types of roles do women have in the text?
. Are the female characters the protagonists or secondary and mmor characters?
. Do any stereotypical characterizations of women appear?
. What are the attitudes toward women held by the male characters?
. What is the author's attitude toward women in society?
. How does the author's culture influence her or his attitude?
. Is feminine imagery used? If so, what is the significance of such imagery?
. Do the female characters speak differently than do the male characters?
Compare the frequency of speech for the male characters to that of the female
characters. c
By applying any or all of these questions to a text, we can begin our journey
in feminist criticism and simultaneously help ourselves to better understand
ourselves as individuals and the world in which we live.
CRITIQUES AND R ESPO N SES
At the beginning of this chapter are a variety of quotations pronounced by

wales concerning females; now let us listen to the voices of females:
you have to make more noise than anybody else, you have to make yourself more
trusive than anybody else, you have tofill all the papers more than anybody else,
mfact you have to be there ail the time and see that they do not snowyou under, if
youare reallygoing toget your reform realized.
Emmeline Pankhurst, British suffragist (1858-1928)
like Boston, is a state of mind. It is the state of mind of women who

alre that their whole position in the social order is antiquahd, as a woman COok^'
t Z an (fenfire with heavy iron pots would know that her entire houseke
uus out of date.
Feminism nave harmed anybodyunlessit was some feminists. The danger is
the studyand c o n te m p la tio n of -ourselves may become so absorbing that /
by slow degrees a high mil that shuts out the great world of thought. *
Rheta Childe Dorr, journalist (1866-194^
Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.
Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler
I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know
that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me
from a doormat.
R e b e c c a W est (1913)
Feminism is an entire world view or gestalt, not just a laundry list of womens issues.
Charlotte Bunch, editor, author (1944-)
It is important to remember thatfeminism is no longer a group of organizations or

leaders. It is the expectations that parents havefor their daughters, and their sons
too. It is the way we talk about and treat one another. It is who makes the money
and who makes the compromises and who makes the dinner. It is a state of mind. It
is the way of life we live now.
Anna Quindlen, journalist, novelist (1945

)
Feminism is a political term and it must be recognized as such: it is political in

women's terms. What are these terms? Essentially it means making connections:
between personal power and economic power, between domestic oppression and
labor exploitation, between plants and chemicals, feelings and theories; it means
making connections between our inside worlds and the outside world.
Anica Vesel Mander (1945-) and Anne K. Rush (1945-)
Femim is a commitment to eradicating the ideology of domination that perme

ates Western culture on various levels-sex, race, and class, to name afe w - ^ n d a
commitment to reorganizing US society, so that the self-development of people can
take precedence over imperialism, economic expansion, and material desires.
bell hooks, Aint I a Woman (1983)

Ferm m sm asks the w orld to reco gn ize at lo ng last that women aren't decorative or-
nam ents, w o rthy vessels o f a specia;i n t e r e s t g ro u p . They are h a lf (in fa ct, now
more than half) o f the national population, an d ju st as deserving o f rights and op
portunities, ju s t as capable o f participating in the world's events, as the other half.
Fem inism s a gen d a is basic: It asks that w om en not be fo rced to choose betw een
public ju stice a n d p riv a te happiness. It asks that w om en be fr e e to define them
selves instead o f h a v in g their identity defined fo r them, tim e an d again, by their
culture an d their m e n .
Susan Faludi, Backlash (1991)
Fem inism is a n o n g o in g p ro ject, a p rocess, undertaken on a daily basis by m il

lions o f w om en o f all a g es, classes, e th n ic a n d racial ba ck grou nd s, a n d sexu al
p referen ces . F e m in is m is co n sta n tly b e in g rein v en ted , a n d rein v en ted through
determ ination a n d co m p ro m ise, so that w om en try, as best they can, to have love
and support as w ell as p o w er a n d autonom y.
Susan Douglas, Where the Girls A re (1994)
The connections betw een a n d a m o n g w om en are the most fea red , the most prob
lematic, and the most potentially tra n sfo rm in g fo rc e on the planet.
Adrienne Rich, poet (1929-)
Disturbingly, for many people, Adrienne Rich's words encapsulate the

essence of feminist criticism: it is feared, it is problematic, and it has the abil
ity and the transformative power to reshape our world. A branch of feminist
studies grounded in feminist theory and scholarship, feminist criticism is a
heterogeneous grouping of scholars, writers, linguists, philosophers, scien
tists, anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists, educators, and peoples
from all professions and walks of life who believe that both women and men
are equal. As a social movement, feminist criticism highlights the various
ways women, in particular, have been oppressed, suppressed, and repressed.
It asks new questions of old texts. It develops and uncovers a female tradi
tion in writing. It analyzes women writers and their works from female
perspectives. It attempts to redefine literary concepts and the dominant
discourselanguage itselfin terms of gender. It disavows the privileged
position of males in a predominantly patriarchal society. It questions basic
assumptions about gender, gender difference, and sexuality. And it demands
that we become resisting readers to the established male hierarchies upon
which our culture and our literature have been shaped.
Critics of feminist criticism often view it as a collection of theorists and
critics who cannot decide what they really believe. Its critics assert that one
group of feminist criticism defines "female" and 'male one way, while an
other develops conflicting and sometimes contradictory definitions. Even
within feminist criticism itself, the various subentogories criticize each

Postcolonist feminists, ft>r example, harshly critique Western frms olh.
cism. Psychoanalytic feminist critics often view their cultures and So! nti'
differently from materialistic or Marxist critics. Because of such difft.re
critics avow that the multiple voices of feminist criticism(s) cannot susta^ 7
unified ideology. *n a
Feminist criticism's conservative critics advocate that the goal of f ,
nist criticism is to destroy traditional values and gender roles. Males and^'*
males, argue these critics, are naturally and biologically different. From th e'
critics' point of view, feminist criticism is rooted in error and has become 7 *
them, the enemy. Some even blame their own lack of success in business f
any other area in the public arena on the rise of feminism and maintain fh*
the chief aim of feminists is "to look for stuff to get mad about." And m ^
of these critics argue that it is now males who are the oppressed.
Whether such criticism is real or imagined, present-day feminist c V
believe that discrimination against women still exists not only in America
worldwidediscrimination in the workplace, in the home, in the church '
government, and in society as a whole. Issues such as the glass ceil''m
human trafficking, slavery, and prostitution continue to plague society1?
such injustices, feminist critics will continue to add their voices of protest
8
Ma r x i s m
Art is always and everywhere the secret confession as well as the undying monu
ments [sic] of its time.
Adolph Bernhard Marx, The Music of the Nineteenth Century, 1855
INTRODUCTION
ith the collapse of communism and the Soviet Union in the late 1980s,
W many heard the death knell pronouncing loudly the demise of
Marxism and its accompanying political and ideological structures. Down
came the Berlin Wall, down came the Iron Curtain, and supposedly down
came Marxism as an alternative form of government to capitalism and as an
acceptable worldview. Many capitalists rejoiced because Marxism had ap
parently fallen. Seemingly, Marxists had only the glorious memories of the
earlier decades of the twentieth century in which to rejoicea time when
Stalin ruled Russia, when Marxist theory dominated both English and
American writings, and when college campuses in both the East and the
West were led and taught by intellectuals who committed themselves to
Marxist ideology. Many now believed that such ideology was finally dead!
Performing only a limited Internet search under the keyword
"Marxism" results in a listing of more than 7 million sites with titles such as
"Learning What Marxism Is About," "In Defence of Marxism," "Marxist
Media Theory," "Women and Marxism," "Marxism, Philosophy, and
Economics," "Living Marxism," and "What Is Living and What Is Dead in
Marx's Philosophy," proving that Marxist theories and criticism are not only
alive but also may even be prospering. Announcements for newly published
texts advocating sympathy for and support of Marxist ideology in all aca
demic disciplines appear regularly. College courses in Marxist political
theory, sociology, literature, and literary theory abound. Perhaps the death
knell for Marxism was struck prematurely.
165
166 Chapter 8 Marxism
Wha, is i. .ha, fascinates oT co ^

Marxism?
East? Why did
The answer liesitinnot disapp
so m rincipies
e of the co re pm Y of Marxist thought-
ugm. * *
Reality itself can be defined and understood.

Society shapes our consciousness. ,
. Social and economic conditions directly influence how and wha, we believe and
value. ,, .
The world as we know it can be changed from a place of bigotry hatred, and
conflict due to class struggle into a classless society in w ic wealth, opportu.
nity, and education are accessible for everyone.
By articulating a coherent, clear, and comprehensive worldview and a plan

of action for implementation of its ideas, Marxism asserts that it provides an
swers to many of the complex questions about how life is and ought to be ex
perienced while simultaneously challenging other ideologies to provide
their pragmatic answers for these same concerns.
The selfsame problems that gave rise to Marxism exist today. Despite its
glory decades of the early 1900s and its present-day seemingly embattled
position, Marxism declares that it offers a comprehensive, positive view of
human life and history that demonstrates how humanity can save itself from
a meaningless life of alienation and despair. A worldview that affords a
bright promise for the future and a transformation of society will not vanish
with the knocking down of a wall or the collapse of the former USSR.
Borrowing Mark Twain's phraseology, "Announcements of Marxism's death
have been greatly exaggerated."
H IS T O R IC A L D E V E L O P M E N T
K arl M arx and Fried rich E n gels
Unlike many schools of literary criticism, Marxism did not begin as an alter
native, theoretical approach to literary analysis. Before many twentieth
century writers and critics embraced the principles of Marxism and use.
nineteednthSrln T the neS ^ criticisms' Marxism had flourished in th
classes an o o n lT afPramatic view f history that offered the workin
providingbodrar>hd^ * * W rld a" d -dividual lives. B
in society Marxism rU P system and a plan of action to initiate chang
demanding of the naL rTofreah^ 131,13011^ 31, economic' and cultural UJ
theory. These and nth^ i ^ S0ciety and the individual, not a literar
b b- is f whal
Chapter 8 Marxism 167
Vteratv theory has its roots in the nineteenth-century writings of

NurX'St U Kial critic and philosopher Karl Heinrich Marx (1818-1885).
lV r^ n. iieve that Marx himself said little about the relationship of his
*Tv;tcht'cS theory. Surprisingly, however, in the standard German edi-
Vjastohtcra ' . wor^s 0{ Friedrich Engels 0--~ (1820-1895),
VXV-W-JU7 J), Marx's
iviarx s friend,
trier
^ of tntr
he 00
^ and . oftentimes_ _ -
coauthor, ------
andJ ' '
Marx, these critic-philosophe
nipau.--, isw^Hire and art fill aimncfr
^mPatri 1 ------ " ____ _
iinpa
nlents on literature and art fill a|m t v/i
rticulates a literary theory

êclearly articulates or methodology of criticism, Marxist
theorvotVVOVo,umes
^clearly
literary critica sm does
___________.
not jdevelop
. - i -------
until^
- ' " methodology
- - o f c "Se neithvol-
philosophical assumpHns, variety of
Marxist approaches to textual analysis that focus on the study of the rela-
Lship between a text and the society that reads it. At the core of all these
Averse approaches are Marx and his philosophical assumptions about the
nature of reality itself.
Marx and Engels articulate their views on the nature of reality in two
w0rks: The German Ideology (1845) and The Communist Manifesto (1848). In
The German Ideology, they develop what has become known as dialectical
materialism, a core belief of Marxism. Originally the word dialectic was used
by the Greek philosophers Plato and Socrates to describe a form of logical
argumentation involving conflicting ideas, propositions, or both. In the nine
teenthcentury, the German philosopher Georg W. F. Hegel (1770-1831) rede
fines the term as a process whereby a thesis is presented, followed by a
counterstatement, the antithesis. What develops from the ensuing debate is
anewidea called the synthesis. Engels and Marx adapt Hegel's concept of
synthesis in formulating dialectical materialismthat is, their understand
ing of how workers can lead a class war and establish a new social order.
BothEngels and Marx assert that "consciousness does not determine life: life
determines consciousness." A person's consciousness is not shaped by any
spiritual entity; through daily living and interacting with others, humans de
fine themselves. To Engels and Marx, our ideas and concepts about who we
are and who we are becoming are fashioned in everyday interactions and in
the language of real life. Such concepts are not derived from some Platonic
essence or any other spiritual reality. In asserting their materialistic view of
humanity, Engels and Marx argue that the economic means of production
within a societywhat they call the baseboth engenders and controls all
human institutions and ideologiesthe superstructureincluding all social
andlegal institutions, all political and educational systems, all religions, and
aHart. These ideologies and institutions develop as a direct result of the eco-
nomic means of production, not the other way around.
Accordingly, all societies are progressing toward communism. Believing
Progress is reactionary or revolutionary, Marx and Engels assert that as a so-
dety progresses in its economic mode of production from a feudal system to
a more market-based economy, the actual process for producing, distribut-
and consuming goods becomes more complex. Thus, each individual s
it* Chapter 8 M,rxl> differentiated. This differentia-
n^mic system become passes. Eventually, main-
work within the eco j n t 0 different s social classes d
* expccMlio' 8 "'.*c h a n g e in the economic base
tains Marx, tl conflicts, lead to a . on inherited wealth and sta-
Such clashes, t r - stem of power be - private property. This
of society ^ * ^ X e d on the customs, and r e i f g ^
^ f l e n t a U s h m u n t e r a b l e c h a n g e s / a l periods developed as a result
According to Marx and Engels ialism, and communism Marx and
of these forces: feudalism, historical penod but a transthonal
Engels believe that soaal.sm .sncd a goal, communism. When so-
stage between capital sm and Enge,s call the worker s paradtse-
ciety reaches this goal-what Ma be established.
then and only then wiUbenevolent Manifesto, Marx and Engels
In their coauthored text Tl _ eoisie, have successfully enslaved
maintain that the capitalists, or fViroueh economic policies and pro-
the working class, or strip the bourgeoisie of its
duction
economic ofand
goods. The pro e anand pla e me ownership
poliltcalpoyr ow F of all property
V^ * in the
hands of the government, who w ill tnen m u y r k
In a later work, Das Kapital (1867), authored by Marx himself, Marx

enunciates the view of history that has become the basis for twentieth- and
twenty-first-century Marxism, socialism, and communism: History and a
corresponding understanding of people and their actions and beliefs are de
termined by economic conditions. Marx maintains that an intricate web of
social relationships emerges when any group of people engage in the pro
duction of goods. A few, for example, will be the employers, but many more
will be the employees. The employers (the bourgeoisie) have the economic
power and thereby gain social and political control of their society.
Eventually, this upper class will control the dominant discourse and formal
ize and articulate their beliefs, their values, and their arts to develop their
ideology. Coined by the French rationalist philosopher Destutt de Tracy in
the late eighteenth century, the word ideology referred to the "science of
ideas as opposed to metaphysics. Marx borrows this term and uses it pejo-
Cnnlr ^ i ^ ^ * 0 * 6 kurgeisie s ruling ideas, customs, and practices.
DroMlria yaUo
proletariat, , T h the
also called mU S'y' ^ slaves
wage rU'ingIn
dass w i l 1 fU
force
u its ideology
on the
*n Ao
velop and control the superstructurP i u ^ boureoisie WlU de'
richer, while the poor become pomer * ' he T mi
surprisingly, the boureeoisip'* n i d m re and more oppressed. Not
system upon which i f was founded ^ffectively worl<s to perpetuate the
the bourgeoisie control a society'* \ \ contrlbng material relationships,
assumes that the material n>Ue ^ ldeology. The average worker, however,
Marx calls this n e g a ^ of the ruling U -;
b sense of ideology faise conscioUsness, which
l.yf,Lli:m.,rll
describes the ways in which the dominant social class shapes and controls
each person s self-definition and class consciousness. From Marx', point of
view, the working classes fail to see who they really are in such a society: an
exploited, oppressed class of people.
In a capitalist society, Marx believes that such an ideology leads to frag
mentation and alienation of individuals, particularly those of the proletariat.
As a direct result of division of labor within the capitalist society, workers no
longer have contact with the entire process of producing, distributing, and
consuming material goods. Instead, individuals are cut off from the full
value of their work as well as from each other, each performing discrete
functional roles assigned to them by the bourgeoisie. To rid society of this
situation, Marx believes that the government must own all industries and
control the economic production of a country to protect the people from the
oppression of the bourgeoisie.
Taken together, The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital develop a the
ory of history, economics, politics, sociology, and metaphysics. In these writ
ings, little is mentioned of literature, literary theory, or practical analysis of
how to arrive at an interpretation of a text. The link between the Marxism of
its founders and literary theory resides in Marx's concept of history and the
sociological leanings of Marxism itself. Marx believed that the history of a
people is directly based on the production of goods and the social relation
ships that develop from this situation. He also assumed that the totality of a
people's experiencesocial interactions, employment, and other day-to-day
activitiesis directly responsible for the shaping and the development of an
individual's personal consciousness. Marx, thus, highlights his belief that
our place in society and our social interaction determine our consciousness
or who we really are.
During Marx's lifetime, the acceptable literary approach to textual
analysis was grounded in sociological assumptions similar to those held by
Marx. Marx, then, had no difficulty accepting his literary peers' methodol
ogy (hermeneutics) for interpreting a text. Known today as the traditional
historical approach, this methodology declares that critics should place a
work in its historical setting, paying attention to the author's life, the time
period in which the work was written, and the cultural milieu of both the
text and the authorall of these concerns being related to sociological
issues. To these criteria, Marx adds another: the economic means of produc
tion. This fourth factor addresses, for example, who decides what texts
should be published, when a text should be published, or how a text is to be
distributed. Such concerns require an understanding of the social forces at
work at the time a text is written or is being interpreted. In addition, they
force the critic to investigate the intricate web of social relationships not only
within the text itself but also outside the text and within the world of the au
thor. In adding this sociological dimension, Marxism expands the tradi
tional, historical approach to literary analysis by dealing with sociological
170 Chapter 8 * Marxism
characters in a w ork o f fiction as well

f u- s This added dim ension, M arx believed, links
thors and the read ..... ,s.,r:1h iri reflects society and how In,
R ussia and M arxism

Thanks to Georgy V. Plekhanov's Russian translation of The CommUtlj
Manifesto, Marx?s theories soon gained wide exposure and
Plekhanov (1857-1918), author of such works as Fundamental Pmblemsof
Marxism (1908) and Art and Social Life (1912), is the founder of the Russia
Social Democratic Party and is considered by some scholars to be the
founder of Russian Marxism. In his writings, Plekhanov argues that gre3|
historical figures such as Napoleon Bonaparte appear in history only when
an intricate web of social conditions coalesce, directly facilitating their devel
opment. Every gifted person who affects society is a product of such social
relations. Artists, asserts Plekhanov, best serve society and promote social
betterment when their art and societal concerns intersect. For Plekhanov, the
then-prospering "art for art's sake" movement signaled a disturbing rift be
tween artists and their social environment. Emphasizing an artist's impor
tant role in society, Russian Marxism and the Russian leadership at the
beginning of the twentieth century insisted that writers should also play a
political role. Embracing Marx's theories, Russia became the first country to
promote Marxist principles as both aesthetic and literary guidelines.
Even before the Russian Revolution of 1917, Communist Party leaders
insisted that literature promote the standards set forth by the party. For ex
ample, in 1905, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (1870-1924) wrote Parti/ Organization
and Party Literature, a work in which he directly links good literature with the
working-class movement. In this work, Lenin claims that literature "must
become part of the common cause of the proletariat, a 'cog and screw' of one
single great Social-Democratic mechanism." Lenin's work defends all kinds
of literature, holding to the supposition that something can be gleaned from
any kind of writing. After the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, Lenin amends
his literary theory and criticism, arguing that the party could not accept or
support literary works that blatantly defied established party policies.
! ussian Revo|ution, the revolutionary Leon Trotsky
u iw ll tev, a",hr e d êrature and Revolution (1924), the first of his nu"y
AdvXa ine a n I y S >nsidered the fe n d e r of Marxist literary criticis;
fom Xt o f ! I . f r Pen' critica' dialogue, Trotsky contends that the
be evolutionary. To' force all p a * *
was absurd. The partv^D jmneys f revolts against capitalism, he belieV J
areas, but not all The o a rT ^rotsky' can offer direct leadership in m t
Helping to * art' he claimed, must be in ^
not dominating it. Furthermore, the party mustg*
what Trotsky called "its confidence" to those nonparty w riters-w h om he

called "literary fellow-travelers '- w h o are sympathetic to the revolution.
The Soviet Union s next political leader, Joseph Stalin (1879-1953), was
not as liberal as Lenin or Trotsky in his aesthetic judgments. In 1927, Stalin es
tablished the RAPP (Russian Association of Proletarian Writers) to guard
against liberal cultural tendencies. This group, however, proved to be too tol
erant for Stalin. Only six years later, in 1932, Stalin abolished all artists'
unions and associations, and established the Soviet Writers' Union, a group
that he himself headed. The union decreed that all literature must glorify
party actions and decisions. In addition, literature must exhibit revolutionary
progress and teach the spirit of socialism that revolves around Soviet heroes.
Such aesthetic commandments quickly stifled many Russian writers because
the union allowed only politically correct" works to be published. Not sur
prisingly, Stalin soon banished Trotsky, with the result that increasingly most
Russian critics and writers succumbed to Stalin's guidelines rather than fol
low Trotsky s public (and dangerous) example. It was left to critics outside
Russia to explore and develop other Marxist approaches to literary criticism.
G eorg L u k acs
The first major branch of Marxist theory to appear outside Russia was devel
oped by the Hungarian Georg Lukacs (1885-1971). Lukacs and his followers
borrowed and amended the techniques of Russian Formalism, believing that
a detailed analysis of symbols, images, and other literary devices within a
text would reveal class conflict and expose the direct relationship between
the economic base and the superstructure. Known as reflection theory, this
approach to literary analysis declares that a text directly reflects a society's
consciousness. Reflection theorists such as Lukacs are necessarily didactic,
emphasizing the negative effects of capitalism such as alienation. Known
today as vulgar Marxism, reflectionists support a form of Marxism in which
a one-way relationship exists between the base and the superstructure. For
these theorists, literature is part of the superstructure and directly reflects
the economic base. By giving a text a close reading, these critics believe they
can reveal the reality of the text and the author's Weltanschauung, or world
view. It is the critic's task to show how the characters within the text are typ
ical of their historical, socioeconomic setting and the author's worldview.
The Frankfurt School

Closely allied to Lukacs and reflection theory, another group of theorists
emerged in Germany, the Frankfurt school, a neo-Marxist group devoted to
developing Western Marxist principles. Included in this group are Theodor
Adorno (1903-1969), Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), Walter Benjamin
N
r! O u iM M M 'n W
, ki Horklu'imor (1895- 1973), among others Agre
(18''M940), an.i Ma* culture'* alienation and fragm,
with . ...... ." that a text is like any other c o m C d > *
the I r.mklurt schooUr _ k e t _ th a tis, how well a commoditv typr0'
duced by capitalism. lh ^ ^ published and when. There ca^ 11^
ultimately determines w .. . . . . -.>ir.n>s directly to human__ n exist
Benjamin and of what Be J bourgeois ideology embedded
b "1 1tB^W e0 8 9 ^ l56)' ^ r ^ o r d i ^ o ^ h t , dPr a m a ^

fth'Lking directly to * e heat ^ theater actuany contro,s ^
way of thil 8 s their ,deas, b conventionality as established
Instead ol blindly accepting bourg5 ^ revolt and seize the motfc,
h ough dramatic conven tons-dre w what became known as the epic
production. Apply* * ^ V o n m e n t of the Anstotehan prem.se of
1 P far Brecht advocates an aoa assumption that the audience
P P time!place, and * are $J ng real. During the
Should be made to behave that ^ audience s normal expect*
drama sperformance, t o * a,ie ation effect. For instance,mhis
Hons, hoping to create what hec jth a direct appeal t 0 ,he audlence
dramas he frequenrty mtermpts t h e ^ >w m rf the moral and
via a song or speech to keep exposed in the drama. Disavowing
social issues to which they a j> that the audience must be
r s V te C d V o i B P , , the epic theater becomes a too! for exposing die

bourgeois ideology that had permeated the arts.
Antonio Gramsci
fleets the economic S s ^ l t lt a l il n T m ^ b r 3586^ ^ ^ suPerstructure re

a complex relationship exists between th Grams^ (1891-1937) declares that
Gramsci asks, is the bourgeoisie able to GbafSe,and the superstructure. How,
over the proletariat? His answ n u C n r an^ mamtain its dominance
he calls hegemonythat is th^ & our8eo*sie establish and maintain what
meaning and define realitv aSl?UrnPdonf' values and meanings that shape
Because the bourgeoisie actnaiT & maj ()r^y f people in a given culture,
the elements that comprise thP 7 the economic base and establish all
orth they gain the spontanpn SUF>er^tlructuremusic, literature, art, and so
pontaneous accolades of the working class. T h e working
iff
l i p f 'S , occord in K to r v ........ u " a i> u ii,,, n7,
%*#y ,he " T ? P0PI fort't w aband ,n r "1'1' 3 k,ni - C S
and accept the dominant values and beliefs a S T - Wn tate"W a id d "
If literature, however, is only a part of th the,r ovvn-
erature actually concerns itself with the boureU^ rS,rUC,ure' 'ben all |it.
becomes a tool of the privileged class, p re v e n tin g T *' ,n effect- literature
Evolutions. W hy w rite and study literature i f * , ' T in fur,her Marxist
5 Upeistructure, which is, in itself, the reflection of h y 3 reflec,i<>n of the
01 the economic base? Although Gramsci ponders s ? 6 0 ' 8 iduas Published
his followers who provides the answer. n Ûestlns, it is one of
Louis Althusser
In seeking an a n s w e r to th e q u estio n o f w h y anvone
literature, L o u is A lth u s s e r ( 1 9 1 8 - 1 9 9 0 ) rejects a basic a s s u m p f l o W ^ f le c
tion th eo ry : n a m e ly , th a t th e s u p e rs tru c tu re d irectly reflects the hase W s
answer, k n o w n to d a y a s p rodu ction theory, asserts that literature should not
be strictly re le g a te d to th e s u p e rs tru ctu re . In his w orks, especially For Marx
(1965) and Reading Capital" (1 9 7 0 ), A lth u ss e r argu es that the sup erstructure
can and d oes in flu e n ce th e b ase. A rt, th en , can and does inspire revolution
A lth u sser b e lie v e s th a t th e d o m in a n t h egem on y, or prevailing ideology,
forms the a ttitu d e s o f p e o p le th ro u g h a p ro c e s s h e calls interpellation o r
hailing the su b ject, w h ic h is id e o lo g y 's p o w e r to giv e individuals identity
by the s tru ctu re s a n d p re v a ilin g fo rce s o f society. A society's w orldview is
craftily sh a p ed b y a c o m p le x n e tw o rk o f m essag es sen t to each individual
through the e le m e n ts c o n ta in e d in th e su p e rs tru ctu re , in clu d in g the arts.
Although th e d o m in a n t c la s s c a n u s e m ilita ry an d p olice force to rep ress
the w orking c la s s to m a in ta in its d o m in a n c e an d ach iev e interpellation, it
more freq u en tly than n o t c h o o s e s to u se th e ideological state apparatus, or
the hegem ony. In e f f e ct , it is th e d o m in a n t c la ss's h eg em o n y that p reven ts
the in su rrection o f th e w o r k in g c la ss.
The dominant class's hegemony is never complete. Such incompleteness
Su8 8 esh> that alternative hegemonies exist and are competing with the dom
inant hegemony for supremacy. If the dominant class s interpellation or hail-
lng the subject fails, then another hegemony can triumph and revolution can
occur. Such a revolution can begin if working-class people write t eir own
bteraturedramas, poem s, and novels compose their own mu^ c, and
Paint their own paintings. If they do so, the working class can establish an
ernate hegemony to challenge the bourgeoisie s hegemony.
A-*'
ir 4 C h arts * Marx' f blood, but through artistic.

h ittlfS or the shedd J? lt the working classes can s,,
tlm>ugh gws or cll|tural activities dominant class CCe:
P " * * " ;! t : U ,d usurp thel ^ ^ r i a n critics, in c lu d e p.
fully a number of T .Z vneo-Ma
j s p z * s s s k * - r *> x a
theories A former student ( M rxist theories by using the co n cern ^
French Marxist critic, ln
^
w
Z
ftwork, A Tteory o/L/femty PWP' f
poststructuralism. In his mosSJ , readers read texts. Most
(Wl.Machemychallen^ l w '^ ^ ^ to be read, described, an^ '
ers consider a text as aniso ' criticism. Macherey declaim
dqued through the methodjo g es of le ^ ^ ,hat
wading is actually a ^ P ^ ^ e e n what we as readers a n ^ l"0'
r about a texfandwhat the work itself is saying, each being separate d
courses. Furthermore, the author's text is not Preclsely the text being explj.
cated by the critic. What authors mean to say and what they actually write and
say are different. The various meanings of their texts continuously escape
writers, for they themselves do not recognize the multiple ideologies at Work
in themselves and in their texts. What Macherey calls an attentive reading f
texts reveals these ideologies operating in any given text, ideologies that oh
work directly against what authors assume they are writing. n
Another post-Althusserian Marxist critic, Raymond Williams (1921-1Q8
develops Marxist ideology and theory in cultural studies, a late tw enf ? ?
century school of criticism whose name was not yet coined nor ife f * let"
ified when Williams began his innovative criticism Tn w n / k f T
post-world War II journal Politics and Letters and his critique o f lire 3 5 ^
hons and forms commencing with the British R * c f htera0 ' badi-
cemury literature in C u ttu rL d s T ety VSO M w ',r ' " ^ - ^ e t h -
chief interest- the relationship b elw eeV ilo ' , J ams evidences his
and all cultural forms are intricatelv ; f deoIogy and c u l t u r e . Literature
'ural and social i n r t ^ S ! ^ ^ ? Wned- ideology ^
Way into the lived e demonsbates how culture ' j ? 'C nature of these
ed eXpenen^ of a oerson-s *1 r o 3rts weave their
M A R X IS T T H E O R IS T S T O D A Y
critic Terry E a g le tw ^ W ^ Jh a v T d" ' ' 0 Fredric Ja m e so n (1934-) and

velops dialectical criticism T minated Marxist criticism. Jame:
A m e r ic a n Marxists, Jamesonlsler^tbT n 'd Form <1971)' a text reVl
asserts that all critics must be aware of th<
ideology when analyzing a text, possessing wh*t Ko n , .
r a r e n e s s . In a later work, The Political Unconscious [flQgn T daleCtlCal S e l -
psychoanalytic and Marxist theories. Borrowing Freud's HJamf S n merge!
unconscious,
oncu , , .,Jameson
.. discovers
, .a Fpolitical unrrf - * the
llI,cai unconscious, f 3 rePressed
^ reDressed rondi-
ss of expto.tat.on and oppress,on. Tire function of Iitemiy a S
believes, is to uncover the political unconscious present in a text J
In 1991 Jameson continues Marxist theorv and . , .
the publication of Postmodernism or the Cu|,ra( ^ ic of Ule c ,allsm In
this work, Jameson argues that cultural logic itself encodes in every object in
society the classical Marxist dialectic of base and superstructure. To read and
understand Jameson s text is no easy task because his complex and some
times abstruse sentence structure embodies his postmodern, critical method
ology, one that attempts through a Marxist lens to reconfigure present-day
political and world systems.
Perhaps the most influential contemporary Marxist critic is the British
scholar Terry Eagleton (1943), author of numerous works, including
Marxism and Literary Criticism (1976), Literary Theory: An Introduction (2008),
and On Evil (2010). Believing that literature is neither a product of pure
inspiration nor the product of the author's feelings, Eagleton holds that liter
ature is a product of an ideology, which is itself a product of history. This
ideology is a result of the actual social interactions that occur between people
in definite times and locations. One of the critic's tasks is to reconstruct an
author's ideology and his or her ideological milieu.
Throughout his long and prestigious career, Eagleton, like most critics,
develops, changes, and redirects his own literary theory. At times he employs
a variety of critical approaches to texts, including the scientific approach of
Louis Althusser, the psychoanalytic ideas of Lacan, and the poststructuralism
of Jacques Derrida. All his diverse approaches to textual analyses attack bour
geois hegemony and advocate revolution against its values.
From the mid-1970s to the present, Marxism continues to challenge what
it deems the bourgeois concerns of its literary counterparts through the
voices of a variety of Marxist critics, including Renee Balibar, Gayatri
Chakravorty Spivak, Toril Moi, and Donna Landry. Critical movements and
theories such as structuralism, deconstruction, feminism, New Histone,sm,
cultural materialism, and postcolonialism have all examined Marxism s
basic tenets and share some of its social, political, and revo utionary nature.
Like Marxism, these contemporary schools of criticism want to change the
way we think about literature and life. Present-day Marxism borrows from
these contemporary schools of criticism and has now evolved into an array
of differing theories, so much so that there no longer exists a single schoo o
Marxist thought. Common to all these Mancist positions ^wover, S the
sumption that Marx, no matter how he is interpreted IbehevKât change
for the good in society is possible if we will but stop and examme our culture
through the eyes of its methods of economic pro uction.
Pb
M
Unlike
s o c ia l, e c o n o m y - ^ im p 0 r t a n i, a fe w c o r e id e a s ,
th e m ^ " ^ e o r i c i e x is t, ^ o s t M a ^ - S M a t e r i a l , n o t s p i r i t u a l . O u r e x is .
e ,y U t o X a -a lity , d e c la r e s M a r x , ^ ^ e s s e n c e . w h a t w e k n o w i s th a ,
t - c e p r e c e d e .^ ' s o c l g r o u p s .AH i T s a S ^
I'o T h activities as eating, work^ ^ e r s ta n d ourselves and our world, we

our culture and society to order of aU our actrons. If, or exam.
mus, first acknowledge the m terr^ ^ we should l;ve, we must stop try.
p ie , w e w a n t to k n o w w h o w (q r e lig io n o r p h i l o s o p h y a n d b e g in b y
Uig to fin d a n s w e r s b y lo o k in g ^ w ith in 0 u r o w n c u ltu r e . U p o n
e x a m in in g a ll a s p e c ts o f o u r a y Q u r b e l i e f s a n d v a l u e s , w e w i l l d is -
e x a m in in g o u r d a ily r o u tin e s , j c ir c u m s ta n c e s th a t d e te r m in e w h o
c o v e r th a t it is o u r c u ltu r a l a n a n d e v e n w h a t w e t h i n k a r e a d ir e c t
- r = = ^ i e , y n o t' o u r r e l i g i o n , o u r s u p p o s e d p h i l o s o -
PhyN o te J Z i s " t s , exists in isolation, including our social life

Everything exists in a dynamic historical process, what Engels and Marx ca
relations or Verhaltnisse, that is, nothing exists in isolation or just V "
Everything is interrelated and exists in a dynamic relationship (Vermittlung)
with a variety of social forces. For example, when we speak about the
"worker," we must also speak about the employer, economics, social class,
social conflict, morality, values, and a host of other concerns. Everything,
claims Marxism, is in a state of becoming, of being transformed. Nothing ex
ists in static isolation.
When we examine our society, declares Marxism, we discover that its
structure is built on a series of ongoing conflicts between social classes. The
chief reason for these conflicts is the varying ways the members of society
work and use their economic resources. The methods of economic produc
tion and the social relationships they engender form the economic structun
o society, the base. In America, for example, the capitalists exploit the work
amonTma etermin*n ^r tbem Varies and their working conditions
Z^turT orVm He T en!S f ^ ^ From this arises the super
is not easily defined. S o m P \ Ween 1 e base and the superstructure, h o w ev e

arxists believe that the base directly affects th
money they will earn, when they will take 7* >uui
their leisure time, what entertainment they will they WiU Spend
1 1!~ nofii.A u,
lr niy/ ar^d even what they
J J r -----------------
' ' * * tMV 11 i v j r
believe concerning the nature of humanity itself.

Marxism addresses its rallying cry to the working classes. All working
peoples can free themselves from the chains of social, economic, and political
oppression if they will recognize that they are presently not free agents, but in
dividuals controlled by an intricate social web dominated by a self-declared,
self-empowered, and self-perpetuating social elite.
Because this social elite shapes a society's superstructure and its ideol
ogy, the bourgeoisie control its literature because literature is one of the
many elements contained within the superstructure. From this perspective,
literature, like any other element of the superstructure, becomes involved in
a social process whereby the bourgeoisie indoctrinate the working classes
with their self-proclaimed, acceptable ideology as reflected in bourgeois lit
erature. What becomes natural and acceptable behavior in society is now
pictured in its literature and, in essence, controlled by the bourgeoisie, who
also control the economic means of production.
Because literature is part of a society's superstructure, its relationship to
the other elements of the superstructure and the base becomes the central
ocus in varying Marxist literary theories. If, for example, a Marxist holds to
e reflection theory, then such a theorist posits that the economic base directly
etermines the literature. For this critic, literature will mirror the economic
ase- On the other hand, if a Marxist theorist believes that elements of the su
perstructure have realities of their own and affect each other and also affect the
ase' a text may be responsible for altering not only other elements within the
SUPerstructure but also the base. Even the critics who give allegiance to this
1 't'** 1 H .mini! the definition of a text anH
witi011 houi .tit.........T f e l g t t * " and,<; the base- its * u .
tlmdiip tn H",1'tliat a text must be mterpreted u, u .
At lumelt M.u'x'sts >* rt " . , |8 weblike social relationshipsT' 0( it,
I. how they define tex ' , il>s and differing methods o f ^
a wUh an array of m U , theory of literature, but many
exists,.h - ^ i ;
m -----
1 ..xrttH Y
METHODOLOGY ism.s methodology is a dynamic

rh to literary analysis, (proper defined as that which
AS s^hat maintains that a prPer \ f a text cannot exist in isolation
process tha or Marxist be * 1 ^ evolved Necessarily, Marxists
f ^ t h e cultural situation m wbl* 8tudy of society are intricately bound
'" the study of literature Marxist approach to texts m ust deal
Such a relationship demands* themes, matters of style, plot, ot
with more than the c ^ " ' ^ hasL on figures of speech and other 11,.
characterization, and thei usua r , t0 uterary analysis. M arxism claims
erary devices used by other app elem ents an d u n c o v e r s th e au th o r's
that it moves beyond tnes ,ad n g the text in its h isto rical context
world and his or h e rwor view 0 f life, M arxist critics a rriv e at one of
and by analyzing the a Th ideology exp ressed b y th e author, as evi-
their chief concerns: f c or, f and h ow this id e o lo g y interacts
t X t h e reader's personal ideology are w h a t in te re sts th e se critics.
Studying the lite ra l or aesthetic qualities of a text m u s t in clu d e the dy
namic relationship of that text to history and the e c o n o m ic m e a n s of pro
duction and consumption that helped create the text a n d th e ideologies of
the author and the readers.
This kind of an ideological and political investigation exp o ses class con
flict, revealing the dominant class and its a c co m p a n y in g id e o lo g y being
imposed either consciously or unconsciously u p o n th e p ro le ta ria t. It also
reveals the workers' detachment not only from that w h ich th ey produce but
also from society and from each other, a process called alien ation , revealing
what Marxists dub fragmentation, a fractured and frag m en ted society. The
task of the critic is to uncover and denounce this an tip ro letariat ideology and
show how such an ideology entraps the working classes an d op p resses them
in every area of their lives. Most im portant, th ro u g h s u c h a n analysis
arxist critics wish to reveal to the working classes h o w th ey m a y end theii
^^Marxist r y Urê?isie throuSh a commitment to socialism.
thor's text refleru SUC^ an anatysis b y elu cid atin g h ow an au
text reflects the writer's ideology th ro u g h an e x a m in a tio n of ti*
fictional world s characters, settings, society, or any other aspect of the text,
prom this farting point the critic may launch an investigation into that par-
ficular author s social class and its effects on the author's society. Or the
critic may choose to begin by examining the history and the culture of the
times reflected in the text and how the author either correctly or incorrectly
pictures this historical period.
Whatever method the critic chooses, a Marxist approach exposes the
dominant class, demonstrates how the bourgeoisie's ideology controls and
oppresses the working class, and highlights those elements of society most
affected by such oppression. Such an analysis, hopes the Marxist critic, will
lead to action, social change, revolution, and the eventual rise of socialism.
q u e s t io n s f o r a n a l y s is
To gain a working understanding of a Marxist approach to literary analysis,

read carefully Nathaniel Hawthorne's short story "Young Goodman Brown"
and ask the following questions concerning this text. In so doing, you will
see the Marxist concerns that are evidenced or simply ignored in the text by
its author. In addition, the following questions will provide you with a
working framework for a close analysis of any text through the lens of
Marxism and for demonstrating Marxism's concern for the interactive rela
tionship between literature and society.
What class structures are established in the text?

What characters or groups control the econom ic m eans of production?
What class conflicts are exhibited?
What characters are oppressed, and to w hat social classes do they belong?
What characters are the oppressors?
What is the hegem ony established in the text?
What social conflicts are ignored? H ighlighted?
Who represents the status quo?
Does the work suggest a solution to society's class conflicts?
What is the dom inant ideology revealed in the text?
Did the main character sup port or defy the dom inant ideology?
Is the narrator a m em ber of the bourgeoisie or the proletariat?
Whose story gets told in the text? W hose story does not get told?
When and where was the text published?
Is the author's stated intention for w riting the w ork know n or public?
What were the economic issues surrounding the publication of the text?
Who is the audience?
Who is the ideal reader? Virtual read er? Real reader?
180 Chapter 8 -Marxism
IT I* and respo n ses

c r it iq u e s criticism , M arxist criticism c
. mlvtical and Rm ,nis . t a is0 w ith w h a t it d oes n ^ ^
Like psyc ()a what a text say . m 0 st p rom inen t con ^ S*y<
* Telly Eagle.on, to sh o w th e te x t as h 'Ca>
^ c r i t i c s , the task of ^ 6< ions o f its m ak in g ab ou t w hich i, ^
S o n because they e x i s t s P * ^ m us, fce u n d ersto o d as p art of the

structures, not f ,at; ^ al processes o f social relah o n s Included w i , ^
namic,ever-evolvtnghiston F e v e r-p re se n t s o c ie ta l conflicts
these social relations are t hve. nots and the haves. Maintain^
clashes, the controlling a society's hegemony and, thereby
their positions of power y ^ suppress ,he working classes, coerc
creating false conscm feP, visjon of reality. Literary criticism's objec-
ing them to accept t P evidenced in texts either through whit a
'text ys orby its silence, the silence of oppression. F ro m a Marxist perspec
Hve all texts are ideological, and the ideologies contained within them must
be exposed to challenge the prevailing social o r d e r
Although Marxism's internal consistency and the sheer breadth of its
critique are impressive, critics of Marxist theories abound. Whereas Marx
and his adherents call their beliefs a theory and a form of criticism, others
dub it a philosophy of life that codifies a world view that is quasi-religious.
Such a worldview, say some critics, demands a total commitment and devo
tion as does any religion. But this religion, they assert, is devoid of God, for it
is thoroughly atheistic. The god of this religion is found in the mirror and in
humankind's imagination. Rejecting spiritual values, the concept of the soul,
immortality, and a belief in God, this religion, which goes under the name of
theory and criticism, is materialistic. Ultimately, say these critics, an accep
tance of Marxist principles denies human worth. Such an all-encompassing
worldview, they argue, will lead to a form of totalitarianism that rests on a
subjective understanding of reality, not objective, absolute truths.
.! er critics assert that Marxist economic theory is simplistic and cannot
eties'1 prnnr.er * ^ r.the correct solution for contemporary soci-
the multifacetd S" to its âsic tenets, orthodox Marxism ignores
g l p s each Ure ' SOCie,ieS that contai" a multiplicity of social
institutions. And aboveaU ndors'anding of human nature and social
sonal freedom, emphasizing in i t f ^ dlsm isses o r sim P 'y iSnores ^
However an indiviH. ? tS P ace econ om ic con cern s,
continue to develoD and t CntlC VieWS M arxis/ its theories and criticisms
P and shaPe ou r c i a l an d cu ltu ral institutions.
9
CULTURAL Poetics or new

Historicism
Nw Historicism is not a repeatable methodology or a Merer,,

so Wf sincerely hope you w ill not be able w
tomsay
ogy ah a l critical program . .
or aitliterary
what
we would have failed. to say what ,tall adds u p to; you coulc
Stephen Gteenblatt and Catherine Gallagher, Practicing

New Historicism
in t r o d u c t io n
D
uring the 1940s, '50s, and '60s, New Criticism was the dominant
approach to literary analysis. At this time, Rene Wellek and Austin
Warren's text Theory o f L ite ratu re (1942) became the bible of hermeneutics,
focusing the interpretive process on the text itself rather than on historical,
authorial, or reader concerns.
A NEW -CRITICAL L E C TU R E
During this high tide of New Criticism, it would have been common to hear
a college lecture like the following in a literature classroom:
Today, class, we will review what we have learned about Elizabethan beliefs
from our last lecture so we can apply this knowledge to our understanding of
Act I of Shakespeare's King Lear. As you remember, the Elizabethans believed
in the interconnectedness of all life. Having created everything, God imposed
on creation a cosmic order. At all costs, this cosmic order was not to be upset.
Any element of the created universe that portended change, such as a violent
storm, eclipses of the sun or moon, or even disobedient children within the
family structure, suggested chaos that could lead to anarchy and the destruc
tion of the earth itself. Nothing must break any link in this Great Chain of
Bring, the name given to this created cosmic order. With God and the angels in
181
182
an'mais being te as ordainedby Elizabethan worldview, leps ^

ta H aving gained l u n d e rs.a n d j^ ^ m U a r , Y ou w iU ^ ^ in
Act I, Scene ii, line* ,fma,e n of the Duke of Ctoucester, has
2 'cene Edmund, the illegihm ^ legitimate son and he,r to the d J Z
tH HpH the Duke that Edgar, the inherit the D uke's title, lands aJ\
dom, wants his father haS betrayed both Edm und (Edgar's half
wealth. Believing his n "These late eclipses in the sun and moo
brother) and himself, the Duke of nature can reason it thus and
portend no good to us 1 W , by the sequent effects. Love cools, friend-
thus, yet nature finds itsetf ^
ship falls off, brothers divide. EUzabethan worldview in operation. The
What we see in these lines' q[ the created cosmic order and the con-
Duke believes in the m ter^ at nificance of the eclipses of the sun and
cept of the Great Chain of Be g- and chaos. Because the Duke believes
moon rests in their mprese" J L directly affects the microcosm (the world of
that the macrocosm (the (hese natUral occurrences (the eclipses) f0r
humanity on earth), h sW and destroying love betw een brothers,
interfering in familiall (K g U a r having already banished his most
between father an g ^ between king and servant (Kent, King Lear's
S c o u r t o a t o having being expelled from the kingdom). The Duke views
iTworid through .he lens of a cohemn, Rena.ssance worldvtew.
OLD HISTORICISM
In such a Formalist lecture, the professor's method of literary analysis repre

sents an example of both New Criticism and what is known today as the
"old historicism." In this methodology, history serves as a background to lit
erature. Of primary importance is the text, the art object itself. The historical
background of the text is only secondarily important because it is the aes
thetic object, the text, that mirrors the history of its times. The historical con
text serves only to shed light on the object of primary concern, the text.
Underlying this methodology is a view of history that declares that his
tory, as written, is an accurate view of what really occurred. This view
assumes that historians can write objectively about any given historical time
period, person, event, or text and are able to definitively state the objective
truth about that person, era, occurrence, or text. Through various means of
historical analyses, historians discover the mindset, the worldview, or the
noth c 8rouP of people. For example, when the professor in our hy-
W h 1 * tKf beHefS f ,he E l m a n s at the beginning of the
of pretunnos.W CU'atmg the Elizabethan worldview-the unified set
P PP ons or assumptions that all Elizabethans supposedly held
Chapter 9 . Cul|
,l(H?tlpSorN,
concerning the makeup of their w o rld n
Elizabethan text K in g Lear, the professorZ.,Ppl>'in8 the assertion........ .
more accurate mterpretation of the dramaf e 1* or can *
the play s historical context. ma ,ha" '( the teacher did not know
THE new historicism

That historians can articulate a unified and ,,
of any given people, country, or era and can X CJ nsistent worldview
jective picture of any historical event are kev StmCt 30 accurate and ob
Poetics or New Historicism challenges AD jrinST " Pt,<!nS that Cul,uraI
to textual interpretation in the ,970s and early 1980s. C u U u r S ^
called N ew H istoricism in America and cultural materialism in Great
Britain declares that all history is subjective, written by people whose per
sonal biases affect their interpretation of the past. History, asserts Cultural
Poetics, can never provide us with th e objective truth or give us a totally ac
curate picture of past events, persons, or eras nor the worldview of a group
of people. D isavowing the old historicism's autonomous view of history,
Cultural Poetics asserts that history is one of many discourses, or ways of
seeing and thinking about the world. By highlighting and viewing history as
one of m any equally important discourses such as sociology and politics and
by closely examining how all discourses (including that of textual analysis)
affect a text's interpretation, Cultural Poetics claims that it provides its ad
herents with a practice of literary analysis that
highlights the interrelatedness of all human activities.

admits its own prejudices. .
. gives a more complete understanding of a text than does the old lustonosm and
other interpretive approaches.
H IS T O R IC A L D E V E L O P M E N T
New Historicism finds its v oice

ship. Such sch olarsh ip is especially fe epis,emological assumptions,
the Renaissance saw various shifts historical era offered New
Marked by historical se lf-c o n s c io u s n e s ^ ^ relationship between
Historicism a repository of cultura & / ieadinK literary spokesper-
history and literature. The English Renaiss ^ tjie disciplines of history,
son, Shakespeare, blazed an innovative ral. .. cti()ns among them. Perhaps
literature, and politics, often blurring e literature are not so distinct
the clearly delineated lines between is ory
Chapter 9 Cultural Poetics or New Historicism
1H4 Lstoricists. In literature can be foUnd
'* hist0]
after oil. choree the ^ f Shakespeare, the emerging New i"lUrV
m history, much not be .hut different
^ W < * " * * COntributin8 to a d thc
comprehensive, uncontestable his
other discourses- ^ give a o - r - , , American of
Althoug development, j 9 especially with the public^"8 10
C p iv u ta ' works of^ ' ^ M o r e to Shakespeare and Louis Montro^

tw0 QAf-Fashiotung. trom tbe Pastoral of Power." tk S
Rfnuissat Queene of Shep ear )turai Poetics that would deveuT
works begin to clarify the yelrs Dter, in 1982, C u ltu reIP o etic^ ,
through the 1980s J f Jheory
t with the publ,
lesced into a critical s, e |att, ln the journal s introduction to a collec
journal, Genre, edited by Gre b)att announced that a new historicism~
tion of R enaissance essays, ^ New Historicism had become a W
had emerged, thereby pro ^ ^ ongoing dialogue of literary theory.
imate and respectable vo ]at( and Svetlana Aplers, along with an
The following year, ' . ity 0f California at Berkeley, launched
editorial board v^fesmMions,which soon became the chief public
another ,oumal, Repraentam , a[ issue> D A Miller, a leading New
S o S , published his essay "Discipline in Different Voices-. Bureaucracy,
Police Family and Bleak House." In this essay, he articulates two of New
H istoricity's major tenets: (1) Literary texts are embedded ,n social and po
litical discourses, and (2) all literary texts are vehicles of power In the next
issue of Representations, another leading New Histoncist, Louis A. Montrose,
published his essay "Shaping Fantasies," reiterating and expanding on
Miller's declaration that literary texts are seats of power. The same year
Representations was issued, another major New Historical text, James I and the
Politics of Literature: Jonson, Shakespeare, Donne, and Their Contemporaries, au
thored by Jonathan Goldberg, declared that different historical eras develop
different "modes of power," with each epoch viewing reality differently,
including conflicting concepts of truth.
Wishing to remain open to differing politics, theories, and ideologies,
New Historicists share a similar set of concerns rather than a codified theory
or school of criticism. Of key interest is their shared view that from the mid-
1800s to the middle of the twentieth century, historical methods of literary
analysis were erroneous. During this time, many scholars believed that history
served as background information for textual analysis and that historians
were obiectivplv J
really w l hfartT- T * y s anu u,m ............
and formula^ , 0ncism refutes 2 . * * * period and state "how it
Literature, it decre S Wn readings of hr assumphons of "old historicism"
decrees, should be read in and interpretive analysis-
a 1Qn to culture, history, society, and
C h ap ter 9 . C u ]tu ,
" PwtlM or N
185
factors th a t h e lp d e te r m in e a t a r t 's m - . " ,rici*m
a Pivo,al eSSa>: m ,he onS*ng d ev eW ln 1987 r
l ^ a r d a P o e tic s o f C u l t u r e " T h is e s s a y & * N ew f c b,a" Pub-
d and v ie w lite ra tu re in re la tio n to c u lte m '8h ts h ow 'led
^ s t r u c t u r a l i s t c r i K c s - J e a n - F r a n ! s7 an d ^ t y ! U s i * W o * t e .
.^ n b latt asserts that art and society are in(Ly tard and Frederi t * ,deas of
6^ d only one theoretical stance (orS ^ ' e d . but
mplex web of interrelationships New M f cricism) to d iJ ^ i Can use
S t f * as a reading practice, s a y s ' c ^ ' t ?
texts and th eir re la tio n s h ip t o s o c ie ty a re i n v e i u l L j ^ ! of criticism. When
array of o ften tim es c o n flic tm g s o cia l an d literary p a n ' 6Clares G" * n b lalt an
strata how a rt a ffe cts s o c ie ty a n d h o w society T C T " ? ? Volve *hat demon
expands th ese id e a s in h is te x t S h a k e s p e a r e W J ' l 988' G " * " b la tt
his reading p r a c tic e a s C u ltu r a l P o e tic s " rath er rh l x , m w hkh he tau n t to
for all p ractical p u r p o s e s r e n a m e s this site o f literarv th NeW Historicism, and
states, is a te rm th a t c o a le s c e s th e co n ce rn s of th isd w T ?**-CulturalPoetics,h e
better than d o e s th e te rm N ew H istoricism . d op ing theoretical site
A ccord in g to G re e n b la tt a n d lik e-m in d ed scholars r n ,
shaped b y th e in s titu tio n a l c h a r a c te r o f A m erican l i t e r ' a n / r H i ? ^ * ? Was
and politics o f th e 1 9 6 0 s , '7 0 s , an d '8 0 s. In th e 1960s t Z T Sm' cu]ture'
in literary c ritic is m w a s N e w C ritic is m , w ith its accompTnyrng
assumptions a n d p r a c .c a l m e th o d o lo g y . F o r exam p le, during G r e e n e s
graduate stu d ie s a t Y ale a p la c e h e h a s sin ce called the cathedral of H ieh
Church N e w C r itic is m G re e n b la tt m a s te re d N ew Critical principles A t
Yale, N ew C ritical s c h o la rs , w rite rs, an d critics such as T. S. Eliot, Allen Tate,
John C row e R a n so m , C le a n th B ro ok s, an d Robert Penn Warren were revered
and their m e th o d o lo g y w a s w id e ly p racticed .
A ided e a r ly in its d e v e lo p m e n t b y th e p ublication and w ide use of
Cleanth B ro o k s a n d R o b e r t P e n n W a rre n 's textbook Understanding Poetry
(1938), N ew C riticism p re s e n te d sch o la rs an d teachers with a workable and
teachable m e th o d o lo g y fo r in te rp re tin g texts. From a theoretical perspective,
New C riticism re g a rd s a lite ra r y te x t as an artifact with an existence of its
own, in dependent o f a n d n o t n e ce ssa rily related to its author, its readers, the
historical tim e it d e p ic ts , o r th e h isto rical period in which it was written. A
text's m eaning e m e rg e s w h e n re a d e rs scru tinize the text alone. According to
the New C ritics, s u c h a c lo s e s c ru tin y results in perceiving a text as an or
ganic whole, w h erein all o f its p a rts fit to g eth er and support one overarching
theme. For th e N e w C ritic s , a lite ra ry te x t is h ig h ly structured and contains
its meaning w ith in itself. To a c ritic-re a d e r w h o exam ines the text on its own
term s by a p p ly in g a r ig o r o u s a n d s y s te m a tic m eth o d o lo gy , the text will
reveal its meaning. Such an analysis, say the New Critics, Js P a r ^ 1^
rewarding because literature offers us a unique kind o ow tha^cience is
us With the deepest truths related to humanity, truths that science
^ b l e to disclose.
Chapter Y Cultural Poetics or New Historicism
186
provide for
What New Criticism did not proviuc- w. Greenblatt
...... ...... and
,lu other r
attempt to understand literature from a historical perspectiy* Crih(
. >. m a historical nprcnQî:. Critic$ v
an
v.iitical analysis, the text was what mattered, not its histori^ ^ a Nevv
Critic
Considerations that any given text may be the result of h isto rical^ C ntev ext
were devalued or silenced. In addition, Greenblatt believed th r
concerning the nature and an a definition of
u a m IIU/l I \/ literature
. . . ---------- were not enc Ûest*0n
andJ other
- a- - critics wanted to
to discuss
discuss how literature
how literatu re was and is fQrnied/
____ Ufaed. pj
interest it serves, and what the term literature really m ean s. D o co
issues' and"the" crultural
ul tu r a 1 m ilieu o
milieu off the tim es o p erate to g eth er to c r emPrarv
- , e a t e ^y
createlif^
um hey wondered, or is literature an art form that w ,11 alw ays be vvi,h^
Cultural Poetics develops as a resu lt o f N ew C rrh c.sm s d o m i n a n t ,
literary criticism and its response, or lack th ereof, to q u estio n s concernin'
the nature, the definition, and the fu n ct.o n o f l.te ra tu re W h ,le Greenbuf.
w as asking a different set of literary q u estio n s, a v a rie ty o f New C r i t i J
theories and th eorists ap p eared o n th e lite r a r y s c e n e . Deconstruction
M arxism , feminism, and Lacanian p sy ch o a n a ly sis b e g a n to challenge the
assum ptions of New C riticism . R ejectin g N ew C r itic is m s claim that the
meaning of a text can be found m ainly in th e tex t, p o ststru ctu ral theorists
developed a variety of theoretical p o sitio n s ab o u t th e n a tu re o f the reading
process, the part the reader p lay s in th at p ro c e ss, an d th e definition of a
text or the actual w ork of art. A m ong th ese litera ry v o ic e s arose Cultural
Poetics.
After readfing sociological and cu ltu ra l stu d ie s a u th o red by Michel
Foucault and other poststru ctu ralists, G re e n b la tt an d a sso ciates both ad
mired and emulated Foucault's tireless q u estio n in g o f the nature of litera
ture, history, culture, and society. Like Fou cau lt, th ey refu sed to accept the
traditional, well-worn answers. From the M arxist sch o lars Georg Lukacs
Walter Benjamin, Raymond W illiam s, and oth ers th ey also learned that his
tory is shaped by the people w ho live it, and th ey accep ted the Marxist idea
of the interconnectedness of all life. Like M arx h im self, G reenblatt and his
like-minded peers believed that w hat w e d o w ith o u r h an d s and how we
make our money do affect how and w hat w e think. In ad d ition , they devised
a new definition of culture, em bracing W illia m s's b e lie f th at culture is the
com me orms of hum an experience exp ressed in art, politics, literature,
n a os o ot er e em ents, each in v o lv ed in a c o m p lex , interrelational
struggle for power. r
structimv u tyie p o ststru ctu ra list th e o rie s especially decon-

aporia ab o n tV !^ 3 i eticf stm ggles to find a w ay o u t o f undecidability, or
not denvine tha^*19 ^ ? reaîty anc* t h e in terp retation o f a text. Although
p u b h e a rn ^ r^ w H ? ^ *he F a c t i o n , and.he
rather than simply assert that a t" ( t f ^ * m Ve b ey 0n d
they challenee th i a ? a text h as m any p ossible m eanings. In so doing.
h i s L i a n s " f u l^ c tu a lT v Pt,0nS ' ^ >d hi^ - i s m , w hich p m s u p p ^
m actu a" y w r>te an o b je ctiv e h isto ry o f any situation. I"
C1 P > e r 9 .Cu
ncsor/Vevv I,.
fcism 17
E d itio n , th e y r e d e f i n e t h e m e a n in g o f a t rld" '
^know ledge and openly d e c la r e th e ir o J u-3nd ass^ t that must
Throughout th e 1980s an d 199os ^ b,ases- cm , *usi
N athan D ollim ore, Je r o m e M cG ann SUch as Cath*
their concerns that the stu d y o f literatu Greenb,att, to n a m ^ Z 3113^ ' '
has teen too narrow. V i e w i n g teT a s
distinction b etw een an artistic p roduction a 3ction' these cr u **?'
dudion or event. T h ey w an t us to see that th ^ ^ ther k^ d Gf W I " ^
M odest P ro p o sal" is a political a rt u Publation o f T n n Z * 1 pr<>
the in au g u ration o f a U S p w
s u r r o u n d in g notin8 that the cerem ^ * *
all the trappings o f sy m bo lism a nd s t r Z T ^ ? 3 K an aesthetic ev en T !?
sunilar exam ples th at h ig h lig h t their critica l* nd in 3 P n . These and
chief public voice, the jo u rn a l Representation] * * * * * Can be fo^ d in their
It would be invalid to assume that co
espouse the co n cern s o f C u ltu ral Poetics U k e Z ^ those who
textual analysis C u ltu ral Poetics is best understood"7 ^ apP h es o f
interpretation that is s till in process, one t h a t k " ^ 3 pr3Ctice < e r a r y
fine-tuning its p u rp oses, its philosophy and ,J COnt,nuaJJy ^defining and
followers. Some of these adherents express c o n f i T ^ ^ aining new
already b e in g a n organized critical school while m UJtUraJ Poetics as
abstract method o f interpretation. For the 'sake i f ^ 866 * as an eW e ,
arbitrarily divide C u ltu ral Poetics into two m a t L ^ Z W<? WiJJ somewhat
ism and New H istoricism . M em bers o f either c r o o nhowevef,
ner group, h^' materiaJ*
continue to
call for a reawakening of our historical consciousness.

declare that history and literature must be seen as disciplines to be analyzed
together.
place all texts in their appropriate contexts.
believe that while we are researching and learning about different societies that
provide the historical context for various texts, we are simultaneously learning
about ourselves, our own habits, and our own beliefs.
CULTURAL M A T ER IA LISM
. nf rultural
Cultural materialism, the British branchofC ^ ^ Poetics, is Marxist
^ ideolo in m
gical roots
theories and political and cultura 1 Louis Althusser an aY ,
the writings of M arxist critics nan agent of change, c
Williams. Believing that literature can se unstable. For hterfure
materialists declare that a culture s h e g e m ^ ^ (he establ.shed canon
produce change, a critic must rea .Hers." By so doing,cn ,c F
against the grain," becoming "resisting readers.^ ^ politica|myths
political unconscious of texts an
Seated by the bourgeoisie.
4. u nr Nt.w Historicism
. C M - '
NEW HISTORICI ^ the American branch of c un

is the name given G reenblatt, alo n e with ^ral
1 "*
M i . ' o ^ " o f its riginat'g ^ , ture p erm eates b o th texts and c r i ^
'other scholars, believes th< intcrw oven, so are critics an d texts, W
Because all of society 18 c ultum in w hich th ey live a n d m which th,
,0 each other and in and to the c ^ inn uenced b y them culture, <
texts am produced. us can escap e pub lic a n d p riv a te cul,Ura,
Historicists believe hat none g g unique interp re ta t.o n for any giv
influences. Each critic will for Historicism co n tin u es to b e redefined
text. Like its British counterpa , oftentim es p ro v id in g conflictin2
and fine-tuned hy ^ f . 0 foxhial analysis. 8
and contradictory approacnes w
assumptions
Like other poststructuralist practices, Cultural Poetics begins by challenging
the long-heldbelief that a text is an autonomous work of art that coma,ns
all elements necessary to arrive a, a supposedly correct interpretation.
Disavowing the "old historical" assumption that a text simply reflects its his-
torical contextthe mimetic view of art and history and that such historical
information provides an interesting and sometimes useful backdrop for liter
ary analysis, Cultural Poetics redirects our attention to a series of philosophi
cal and practical concerns that highlight the complex interconnectedness of all
human activities. It redefines both a text and history while simultaneously re
defining the relationship between a text and history. Unlike the old histori
cism, New Historicism, or Cultural Poetics, asserts that an intricate connection
exists between an aesthetic objecta text or any work of art and society and
that all texts must be analyzed in their cultural context, not in isolation. We
must know, it declares, the societal concerns of the author, of the historical
times evidenced in the work, and of other cultural elements exhibited in the
text before we can devise a valid interpretation. Such an approach to textual
ana ysis questions the very act of how we can arrive at m eaning for any
politicafact^1^ ^ ^ ^ ^ & a soc^ evenb a lon g-h eld tradition, or a
M ich el F o u cau lt
Cultural Poetics critics find the basis for *u

assumptions in the writinoc c *.u r their concems as well as some ol
88 of the wentieth-cemury French archaeol
Chapter 9 . Cu|,
ural I'oeti
historian, and philosopher Michel p rs" r New m (1[jasm
? l f " L l ee"0" C
X tT h T jto rv bl'Kins hi,
declares that history is not Y' Unlihe mnv ' " e" r!ical structure bv
a middle, and an end) n " T (i e ' T C "*-
going forw ard tow ard some
explained as a series of novvn end). in g j i.f. Purposefully
destiny or an a l l - p o w e r f u M ^ P ^ eff ^ con rolled h' ca""<>* *
tionship of a v a rie ty 'o f ^ r Poucault, history'!, the co6! mY9*L,rh,U8
, e v t discourses or , , y the cmplex interrela-
poh tical, and so o n - t h a t people think a L T r i WayS~ 'artistic' soci^
these d isco u rses interact in any ejven h . k about ,heir orld. How
Rather, their interaction is d e p e L e n t on l ^ 8' period is not random.
Foucault calls the epistem e that is fh, T '!fyin8 Principle (or pattern)
period in history develops its own oereenHo lan8ua8e and thought, each
ity (or w hat it defines as truth)- sets tin L concernlng he nature of real-
standards of behavior- establishes ifc ^ Wn accePtable and unacceptable
good or bad; and certifies what ^ m u p T n ^ e V i ^ 81" 8 W,ha de
a."n c ! f: n d h! yardS!iC,k, Whereby aU established actions
will be d eem ed acceptable.
To u n ea rth the epistem e of any given historical period, Foucault bor
rows tech n iq u es and term inology from archaeology. Just as an archaeologist
m ust slo w ly and m eticu lou sly dig through various layers of earth to un
cover the sy m b o lic treasures of the past, historians must expose each layer
of d iscou rse th at com es together to shape a people's episteme. And just as
an arch aeo lo g ist m u st date each finding and piece together the artifacts that
define and h elp exp lain that culture, so must the historian piece together
the v a rio u s d isco u rses and their interconnections among themselves and
w ith n o n d isc u rsiv e p ra ctice s any cultural institution such as a form of
g o v e rn m en t, fo r e x a m p le that w ill assist in articulating the episteme
under in v estig atio n . , ,
From this p o in t o f view, history is a form of pow er. Because each era o
people d ev elo p s its ow n epistem e, the episteme actually controls how ha.
* * j - i*f . T-TiQfnrv then becomes the study and un-
era or grou p o f p eo p le view that ultimately de
earthing o f a vast, com plex w eb of interconnectingio
term ines w h at takes p lace in each cu ture * yri , iod ,0 another is
W hy o r h o w ep istem es change Ifromone h , ' ^ / w a r n i n g is certain,
basically u nclear. T h a t they cha g nineteenth centurythe shift
Such a ch ange occu rred at the beginning example and initiated a new
from the A ge o f R easo n to rom anticism , rejatjonships developed among
episteme. In this n ew historical era, diffe ^ ^ were deemed
discourses that had n o t previous y evo Foucault asserts t at e
u naccep table in th e p rev io u s h i s t o r i c a P breaks from one episteme to an-
abrupt and often rad ical changes th a . cau b u k e the discourses th
other are n eith er good n o r bad, valid nor
New HistoriC'Sm
, r, . c u m , > ^ 9 ' isti0 their o w n rig h t; they are nei-
1*) Chapter 9 . teine 9 e* lS
, different cp* th at th ey are influenced
help pnxh'ce rt'^ n; oral, but * " < n9 m u s t a* ,'v e B ecau se th eir thoughts,
tlu-r moral nor i hist hich they e p is tem es, historians
A a " d b y the are c o l o ^ * * o th e r h istorical period,
and pw)u5jvJ ? and other at their 0 w n J c o n fron t an d articulate
" r ^ ^ * S t f S ^ " I h T v e n o ts d isco u rses o r the mate-
r"al evidence of past e j ^ d n a t i o n of h * ^ f a n e p istem e (i.e., on e that pre-

Such an archaeology ,ogical view , desig n ). In ste a d , this kind
lieves, Will not unearth ^ political ^ irreg u lar, a n d often contra-
c h a n g e d /^ re je cte d to fom T h e
z tt& s& Z b -
-truth" as Perceivl ^ ' a .s acceptable standards.
nslv establishing that era s v
,h H
Clifford Geertz
In addition to borrowing many ideas from Foucault, C ultural Poetics also

uses theories and methodologies from the writings of the cultural anthropol
ogist Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), Geertz believes that there exists "no
human nature independent of culture," culture being defined by Geertz as "a
set of control mechanismsplans, recipes, rules, instructions," that govern
behavior. Each person must be viewed as a cultural artifact. In addition, how
each person views society is unique because there exists w hat Geertz calls an
information gap" between what our body tells us and w hat we have to
rannntv unction in society. This gap also exists in society because society
r r ^ r in8 T happens amon all its people. Like individu-
And it is this informal m 6 â p s'vitl1 wât ^ assum es to have taken place,
the subjectivity of history 8aP# ^ m b th peoPle and society, that results in
for describing culture, thick description * anth' P oloS ical m ethodology

tion describes the seem inelv ! n ^ o in e d b y G e e r tz , th ick desenp-
practice. By focusing on detads p r e s e n t in an y cultural
contradictory forces at work 6 fu.ailS/ Re Can then reveal the inherent
Geertz, Cultural Poetics thenrict ^ f C ld tu re- B o r r o w in g th is idea frm
culture must be uncovered nnH d ? C,are th a t e a c h s e p a r a te discourse of a
courses interact with each othpr3 0 3 ^ 6 ^ ' n ^ P e s o f s h o w in g how all d>s
elem ents o f culture. The intSra, t d W ith ^ t i t u t i o n s , p e o p le s , and othe
a c t i o n among the many Afferent discourse*
'****6.ui'
9 . Culllmil
shaf,eS a cu ltu re and interconnects ,, "W........ i'm |91

writing, read ing, and interpret ,u h,"" n actiein
critic em phasizes. 1 ' " <>f a test that it, nclu<l'"g the
1 uUural Poetic,
Texts, H istory, and Interpretation
Because texts
*---- are o simply
u t one q of[ yt
Cultural Poetics critics believe that a Z e s Z T hdP ^ a culture,
redect but also, and more important resonnH Y [Y SOCial docum> that
Since any historical situation is an int heir historical situation,
discourses, Cultural Poetics scholars center f ften comPetin8
interpretation of a text would be incomolPiP if ? ! ry' declarin8 tha* any
rela tio n sh ip to
relationship to the
th e d iscouurses
d isco rse th at heln^H, c . . we
We do
do not
not consider
consider the
the text's
text's
resp o n se. F ro m th is p o in t o f vêw a ^ e c o T * ! ^ the teXt is 3
ing id e a s a m o n g th e au th o r, society, custom s,
tices th a t a re a ll e v e n tu a lly negotiated by the author and the teader and m-
flu en ced b y e a c h c o n tr ib u to r 's epistem e. By allowing history a prominent
p la ce in th e in te rp re tiv e p ro cess and by exam ining the various convoluted
w ebs th a t in te rc o n n e c t th e d iscou rses found within a text and in its historical
settin g, w e c a n s u c ce ssfu lly n egotiate a text's meaning.
C u ltu ra l P o e tic s h o ld s to the prem ise of the interconnectedness of all our
actions. F o r a C u ltu ra l P o etics critic, everything we do is interrelated to and
w ith in a n e tw o rk o f p ra ctice s em bedded in our culture. No act is insignifi
cant; e v e ry th in g is im p o rta n t. In ou r search to attach meaning to our actions,
C u ltu ral P o e tic s c ritic s b eliev e that w e can never be fully objective because
w e are all b ia se d b y cu ltu ra l forces. O nly by examining the complex lattice-
w o rk o f th e s e in te r lo c k in g fo rce s or d iscou rses that em pow er and shape
cu ltu re , a n d b y r e a liz in g th a t n o sin g le discourse reveals the pathw ay to
o b jectiv e tru th a b o u t o u rse lv e s or ou r w orld, can we begin to interpret either
our world or a text. . . . ., .- j
The eoal o f a Cultural Poetics interpretive analysis is the formation and
, ^ r " onPHrs of culture," a process that sees life and its
an understanding o f a p o e t ic s o t c , P^ allowing for a more
sundry activities as aesthetic endea ^ anaIytfo one. By embracing
m etaphorical interpretation o f rea y rultural Poetics critics main-
and p ra c tic in g th e ir fo rm o f {ite rW " ^ al, w orld of the text but also the
tain th at w e w ill d is c o v e r n o t o n ly w e n egotiate m eaning with
p re se n t-d a y s o c ia l fo r c e s w o r k in g o ti()n with a text is a dynamic,
printed m aterial. Like history itself, ou incomplete.
ongoing process that will always be some dynamic and sometimes
Because Cultural Poetics' history <rlJ1 norms and concepts while
tense rela tio n sh ip b e tw e e n rejecting es a * ^ theoretical assumptions
positing an d d e v e lo p in g n ew o n e s, a r tv it
192 Chapter 9 Cultural P o e t ic or New Historicism
this site of literary theory a-jects and accepts will help us in ud
ing its multiple methodologies.
WHAT CULTURAL POETICS REJECTS

Monological interpretations of a given culture, people, or historical era can
rately demonstrate that culture's beliefs and values. ^ aCcu.
A historian can establish the "norms' and the truth of any social order
A writer or a historian can be totally objective.
Autonomous artifacts, including literary texts, can or do exist.
Literature is shaped by only historic moments. History serves as a backgr
for literary study.

Only one correct interpretation of a text exists.
CULTURAL POETICS DOES AND A C C EPTS

WHAT
. .. ,inp between history and literature, believing that
L 7 ~ ) T n d context (history) are the same and that literature has no his-
tory of its own but is ensconced in cultural history. . . . .
I, admits that definitive interpretations of a text are unattainable because rete-
vant material concerning a given text or action is too diffused to be exhaustively
gathered We can thus never recover the original meaning of any event or text
because we cannot hear all the voices that contributed to that event or collect and
experience all the data surrounding that event's or text's creation.
It recognizes that power affects literature as deeply as it does history; some nar
ratives are unjustly stifled, being intentionally repressed, subordinated, and
forgotten. When uncovered, these seemingly trivial stones or mini narratives
have a surprisingly significant impact, impeding the creation of an overarching
historical narrative.
It believes that texts, like all forms of discourse, help shape and are shaped by so
cial forces.
It looks to single moments in history that may have influenced or been influ
enced by a literary text produced at the time, relying heavily on historical docu
ments to discover these significant moments. History can no longer be consid
ered simply "background" information for textual analysis but an essential
element in the interpretive process.
indi!l!hlS
individuallthatHiterf
reader UTlistener
of or iS Shaped by historical
to these texts. moments while also shaping the
eringhow aêxt wasV^ lmportant elements in textual analysis is discov-

- - sating the historical /d social mo-
It belipvp*; ibat ... P nchon, not its supposed interpretation.
and political agmd^No writCT iTcritbieCled baSeS' CU!tUral

r cnhc can ever be entirely objective.
Chapter 9
Cultural
P<*KCSor New Historic!ism 193
M ETH O D O LO G Y
Like other approaches to literary analuc- ^

of techniques and strategies in its i n t e m l f ltUral P * * includes an array
being dubbed the correct form of in v Z lf ^ f ln<luiries, with no
ogy, Cultural Poetics scholars b egin ^ y^ 83110" ' No matter their methodof
is shaped by the culture that uses i t By C u ^ 'anguae and
mean much more than spoken words For t t / T Cul,ural p<*cs critics
courses as literature, social actions and a ' language incIdes such dis-
person or a group impose their ideas nr a S ClaI relationship whereby a
Included in this definition of h Z n another
or other relationships that in v o lv /e fth e ^ 1.St ry. LikeIiteratur^ writing,
power, history becomes a narrative discourse 7 7 ^ 7 7 " 3 relationshiP of
narrative discourse, history must be viewed i m lterature or anY other
fully articulated or completely explained. Fmm f t ^ e ^ M ^ W s t o ^
hterature are nearly synonymous, both being narrative discourse that tater-
act with them historical s.tuations, their authors, their readers, and their
present-day cultures. Neither can claim a complete or an objective under
standing of its content or historical situation because both are ongoing con-
versations with their creators, readers, and cultures.
Because Cultural Poetics critics view history, literature, and other social
activities as forms of discourse, they strongly reject the old historicism,
which sees history as necessary background material for the study of litera
ture. They view a work of art or a text as they would any other social dis
course that interacts with its culture to produce meaning. No longer is one
discourse superior to another, but all are necessary components that shape
and are shaped by society. Clear lines of distinction do not exist among liter
ature, history, literary criticism, anthropology, art, the sciences, and other
disciplines. Blurring the boundaries between disciplines, Cultural Poetics in
vestigates all discourses that effect any social production. Since these practi
tioners believe that meaning evolves from the interaction of the variously
interwoven social discourses, no hierarchy o 1SC^ irS^ l^ a of textual
discourses are necessary and must be investigate m ^P about the
analysis. The interprelive process
methodological assumptions for d c r i h c ca re-
can
for every practitioner because ^ S a f o n from^ther discourses,
veal the truth about any social produc (j<; work as a socjal produc-
Since Cultural Poetics critics vie ]eng o f Cultural Poetics resides
tion, a text's meaning as perceived t rIocking discourses of its author,
in the cultural system composed of t _._,.n;ne a Cultural Poetics critic
the text, and its reader. To unlock textua an(j dictates found within a
investigates the life of the author, the socia jo n g jn ce an actual person
text, and all reflections of a work s bistonca both individual concerns
authors a text, his or her actions and e ie
New His'icism
uU.m.1
|| t"
I ' ,ics
-
Chapter \ iro essential elements of the text v
ami those of the author s s0C^ !^|an v jor, as reflected in a society's
in addition, the standards of b e these behavioral codes sim 8, of
t o n , must also be i n v j s b ^ b ^ ^ ^ Thc tex(
wously helped shape am flP ,w these behavioral social codes ^
viewed as an artistic wor nce and to realize the complex T
begin to understand a text s s>8 aJ poetics critics declare that all th^ 1
structure of which it is a pa , js ignored, the risk
amas of concern must be mveshg*.ed understanding abou t * * >
fuming to the old histoncism h t ^ of texlua, analysi c xt as
asocial production, is great.Dur g P tions and methods as We T
Poetics critics also question their own assuu p . well, f0r
they believe that they, too, are products of and act as s ping influences 0n
To avoid the old historicism's error of thinking that each historical pe_
riod evidences a single, political worldview, Cultural Poetics avoids sweep.
ing generalizations and seeks out the seemingly insignificant details and
manifestations of culture frequently ignored by most historians or literary
critics. The anthropologist Clifford Geertz describes these seemingly in.
significant details as anecdotes that are "quoted raw, a note in a bottle "
Anecdotes are well-preserved messages that most often come to us in their
original state, unaltered by the ideologies of publishers or other institutions
of preservation. As soon as they are gathered together, a collection of ane
dotes will reveal "counterhistories" or alternative perspectives of an incide t
or era presented by voices that usually go unheard in a monolithic intemre-
tation of history. Sometimes these stories present a blatantly rebellious aHih,ri'
toward the powerful history-makers, recasting events from the l u S net
spechve of marginalization. At other times, the stories uncovered arp P ,
interested voices recording events that they see Anecdotes suth as P'
diaries, for example can and n fw a * y ^ ec<aotes such as personal
ships not found in traditional histories. ^ Stmctures and relation-
courses and b a ttle g ro L ^ fo T c o X c tin g T ^ Hterature as social dis'

becomes "culture
becomes "culture in action." By highlight G
in action aCtlons' and customs, a text
insignificant Vi*8
anecdotal stories or insignificant^ seerrdn 8 ty unusual
8 m? seemin8ty u n u su al junctures of
Tt.,.mas .......... S 1 happenings, such as a note written by
Thomas Jefferson to one of his slaves SUch a s a n o te written by
y Nathaniel Hawthorne, these critir vT ^ P rase etcb ed on a window pane
social codes and forces that mold a o PG t 0 t o bg h t those competing
moment or incident rather than an ^ 1Ven s ciety. E m p hasizing a particular
Poetics critic will often point out unp " ^ ^ 8 Visi o f society, a Cultural
b a n ^ ^ c ^ E ^ ia H aw thorne's havinnVGu dorud connections, for example,
d s first romance, The Scarlet L e t t ? * h ead ach e a fte r read in g her hus-
ro n /,0fmtanCe' The H use o f the Seven r ' n the endin8 of Hawthorne's sec-
M ark T mir'a ' N W Ywrk' and somo l * CS' r b etw een the clim ate and envi-
wain s A d v e n t u r e s o f H u c lc l , 0 catln s, descriptions, and actions in
/ Huckleberry Finn. C u ltu ra l Poetics scholars
Chapter 9 Cultural PfW-
dl 1 oetics or New W;.*
. . 1New Historicism 195
believe that an investigation into these and i
the complex relationship that exists ? l PPeni"l! will demon
show how narrative discourses such as histn^ e8 1 dis orses and will
productions interact with, define, and are in ? Urature' and other social
What we learn by applying these p rin c ip le s ,'? "1' T aPed by heir culture,
is not one voice, but many voices to be hearH . methodol()8*es is that there
tun?: our own, the voices of others, the voiced f E " * " 8 teXts and our cul'
present, and the voices that will be in the futur P3St/th<? V iceS f the
q u e s t io n s f o r a n a l y s is
When analyzing any text from a Cultural Poetics point of view, Stephen
Greenblatt and other critics suggest we ask and investigate the following
questions. As you read these questions, be prepared to provide answers
based on your reading of Nathaniel Hawthorne's short story "Young
Goodman Brown. By so doing, you will be actively engaged in using
Cultural Poetics as an interpretive tool.
What kinds of behavior or models of practice does this work reinforce?

Why might readers at a particular time and place find this work compelling?
Are there differences between your values and the values implicit in the work
you are reading?
On what social understanding does the work depend?
Whose freedom of thought or movement might be constrained implicitly or ex
plicitly by this work?
What are the larger social structures with which these particular acts of praise or
blame might be connected?
What authorial biographical facts are relevant to the text?
What other cultural events occurred surrounding the original production of the
text? How may these events be relevant to the text under investigation.
C RITIQ U ES A N D R E S P O N S E S
In the preface to his 1989 text The New b eltfs

was one of the first scholars to delineate th
Every expressive act (including literature) is embedded in a network of material

practices. .. . fools it condemns and
Every act of unmasking, critique, and opposition use
risks falling prey to the practice it exposes.
Literary and nonliterary texts circulate inseparably
,* .. ................................ I Poetics or New Historicism
. No discourse, tmaginaH- gv access ,o unchaging ^ ^^

presses inalterable human n , te (0 describe culture under r
. A critical method and language adequate nder capiul
participate in the economy they describe.
a n l'am sh ared 'b y the text. Believing that art (including literature) and s ^ !
enfanTinterrelated, Cultural Poetics critics em b race the p rtn cp les of diffe
ent schools of criticism to unlock a text's p ow er and tnfluence, including the
close reading" principles of New C riticsm and a variety of poststructural!
ist approaches, such as feminism and M arxism . D en yin g a monolithic or
monological interpretation of any event, p erson , or h istorical era, Cultural
Poetics seeks to discover the personal v ig n ettes o r a n e cd o te s" that a ,e
ignored, repressed, or suppressed by m an y critics. S uch m ini moments in
history, they believe, will reveal the multiple counterhistories that have been
marginalized by previous scholars and w riters. These con stru cted narratives
reveal the power structures in both the text and the cu ltu res that produced
them, unleashing the silenced voices that can help us resh ape our concepts
and interpretations of not only texts but also history, society, and ourselves.
Like other evolving, critical methodologies, Cultural Poetics has faced
and continues to face some objections. First, because Cultural Poetics uses
historical methods and artifacts of history, it is necessarily working from
"inside" the system it is critiquing. Such subjectivity opens this interpretive
method to accusations of undermining its own arguments. Second, by plac
ing emphasis on anecdotal evidence, it has been accused of bad historiogra
phy. From one single thread of culture one anecdote Cultural Poetics
critics often create rather significant philosophical, historical or political
theories. Third, while valuing anecdotal evidence or artifacts and other
forms of "local knowledge," Cultural Poetics then broadens such knowl-
edge, making claims that reach far into a given culture. Fourth, Cultural
êI ' T * ; " determin y reigns in both literature and history, but
o M h it d k c ly dS,.a S,r ngly dete m istic attitude toward the effects
culture And fiftfTs Pronouncements concerning power in a given
" ^r:ndr^h-h
a\C
ulturaip
oe a
u^
documents and any other cultural f ^ texts and e d u c e s historical
As Cultural P o W d l v e Z ' ^ Hterary term s
and the various kinds of r v the. twentY'first century, the frequency
question, Cultural Poetics ha* 10Sms wid undoubtedly continue. Without
Anglo-Saxon ? * * * * GVery area of Hterary studieS' K
American and British Romantic UryJ iterature/ especially influencing ho
analysis, Cultural Poetics allow8 ^ rou8 ^ its m u ltip le approaches totexta
past, speaking once again loudS many f the silenced voiceS ^
POSTCOL n . a u sm
The fin a l hour o f colonialism

Asia, and La tin America rise
right to self-determination.
Guevara, speech to the United Nations, December 11,1964
T a ^ N e w S P S S 'S * * ^ ^ Unti ^ d~
m sisten ce th a t " t h e " o n e co rrect interpretation o f a t e T c o S d t e l e "
if c ritic a l re a d e r s fo llo w th e p rescrib ed m ethodology asserted by the New
C ritics. P o s itin g a n a u to n o m o u s text, N ew C ritics paid little attention to a
text's h is to ric a l c o n te x t o r to the feelings, beliefs, and ideas of a text's read-
crs. F o r N o w C r itic s , a te x t s m ean in g is inextricably bound to ambiguity,
irony, a n d p a r a d o x fo u n d w ith in the structure of the text itself. By analyzing
the tex t a lo n e , N e w C ritic s b eliev e th at an astute critic can identify a text's
cen tral p a r a d o x a n d e x p la in h o w the text ultim ately resolves that paradox
w hile a lso s u p p o r tin g th e te x t's overarchin g theme.
Into this seem ingly self-assured system of hermeneutics marches philos
opher and literary critic Jacques Derrida along with similar-thinking scholar-
critics in the late 1960s. Unlike the New Critics, Derrida, the chief spokesperson
for deconstruction, disputes a text's objective existence. Denying that a text
is an autofelic artifact, he challenges the accepted definitions and assump
tions of both the reading and the writing processes. In addition, he insists on
questioning w hat p arts not only the text but also the reader and the author
. \. _______ Doeaiica
Because nprrida
Derrida and other like-minded cnt-
play in the interpretive process, of structuralism in
ics c h ro n o lo g ic a lly ccom
cs chronologically o m ee after ^ oder" ' yostm oderns or poststructuralists.
literary th e o ry , th e y a re used to denote these postmodern
Recently th e te rm postist critics is b ein g
thinkers. r Culler, J. Hillis Miller, Barbara
Jo n a tm a ", ^ _^ s 0 ^.pcfion
1o
T h e se p h ilo s o p h e r c r itic s ^ question the language of
Johnson, an d M ic h e l F o u c a u lt, to n a m e a few a . q
197
,lon>jUm ' Wh beUf VC ^
r 10 r stcl ,b e t f e * ,b e la n g u a g e o f scien ce and
Chap** lu
.. .^ g s f c ^ s t s s s s a
i S IS "" I S t " S 5 < * " & " I T * " , I >
u uê of u Tt,afie u B a* the dl8 ru aoe and form the text
^ e r yday t"e 'p o th er w^\y8i ^ ^ a i n , text and the
isn o dfe! " a d i * 01" 0 *'i'n U crary ,? e tW Y n ' a ' " aKe h e l p s c r e a te an d shape
W y *ee 'lideas f ^ nnot s e p a 'fce itics, tons18* *
used to ^ e created b y la n g u a g e , m any pos(.

5 3 we call * * tive reaUty can b From this point of view.
Believing that ^ 1S a see1* instead , many realities exist. In
modernists assert ob- ctive reality e ^ critics b e lie v e that reality is
no single or P " objective his or her subjective understand-
disavowing a individual ere g co m e to ag ree upon b
? erSP(eihe nature of reality itself the co m m o n g ood , if reality is
Asocial concerns, ^ " a n s w e r for th ese p o stm o d e rn thinkers is
different for each individual? T h e a ^ a d o m in a n t cultural
that each society or c u ltu r e .deo)ogy or, u sin g th e M arxist term, its
group who determines that c ^ o f rig h t a n d w rong, and its
hegemony-that is, its do ^ a iven cu ltu re are consciously and
sense of P ^ n a l " r t h AU P^ P g prescribed hegem on y.
UnC l ^ t happens, however, when one's ideas, o n e 's th in k in g , or one's per-
sonal background does not conform? W hat h ap p en s fo r exa m p le, when the
dominant culture consists of white, A nglo-Saxon m ales an d one is a black fe-
male? Or how does one respond to a culture d o m in a ted b y w h ite males if
one is a Native American? For people of co lo r liv in g in A frica or in the
Americas, for Native Americans, for fem ales, and for g a y s an d lesbians, and
a host of others, the traditional answer already h a s b e e n articulated by the
dominant class and its accompanying hegem ony: silen ce. L iv e quietly, work
quietly, think quietly. The message sent to these "O th e r s " b y the dominant
culture has been clear and consistent conform and b e q u iet; deny yourself,
and all will be well.
But many have not been quiet. W riters a n d th in k e r s , su ch as Toni
Morrison Alice Walker, Gabriel G arcia M a rq u e z , C a rlo s F u en tes, Gayatri
Edwar,d Said' F jantz Fanon, and Ju d ith B u tler, to n am e a few, have
fhese cultmes d p ?1 and challen e the d o m in a n t c u ltu re s and the dictates
necessary. Thev B pV Th<l7 continue t refuse silen ce and choose defiance, if
ethics really matters'They assTrt'adiff' S VeW f ^ f Va' UeS fno

of the dominant culture bm , dlfferent p ersp ectiv e, a vantage point not
pies: They speak fornni' ? fr m w h ich v iew th e w orld and its peo-
but a host; not one intermvt n* ^ Ut m any ; n o t one cultural perspective'
Speaking fo r the onn ^ ' Ufe' b u t co u n tless,
scholars African, A u s h ^ i T x i ' su P P re ss e d , a n d sile n c e d , these cn
n ' N ative A m erican , fem ale, gay and le^bi
1
:J W
Chaptj.r 1 0 , ,,
among others*re making themselves \ 19 9
insistent, dominant, and generally .... fU0rd amunif
can affect cultural change, these w . t,rPvvoring culhlrv ,.t '<l,hony of the
hegemony. In their struggle for ,r 's rLÛs<- to conf * vinK that they
I Uh-S their beliefs I Z Z ''! * * ' * *
L (heir umlerehmdmi; of " t*;r.>ry literary tabte d " ^ tnk'
' \ h i s d iv e ^ e m S P
b re "a o fc u lh ira l stu d ios an d included an a ^ nd, cri,it* h und<* the um-
Amencan s.ud.os pos.colonial studies, and K
i" ? dor 8,udi-African-
ideas and assumptions in the midst of a T thers' AU are presenting their
trolled by the dom inant few. In Great B r i t a l n T f " ,ha' h a s '<>" b n con-
cultural studies are often used interchange u f ms Cu,tural "iticism and
criticism prim arily focuses on textual a 1 - N rth America cultural
whereas cultural studies refers to a much , ysis.or other artistic forms,
literary and artistic forms analyzed in their IaCT ' lnterdisciplinary study of
texts. In this chapter, we will consider one nf^,la. ' ecolnomic' or political con-
ries: postcolonialism. In Chapters 11 12 and n ^ Varying the-
other theoretical stances: African-American r v 6 W* then present three
rear r - f e saxtssMS
Each of these theories possesses unique concerns. EcocriHcism, for exam p^
highhghts the relationship betw een literature and the environment, while
African-American criticism and gender studies emphasize that their individ-
ual and p u blic h isto ries do matter. They believe that their past and their
present are in tricately interw oven, and they declare that by denying and
suppressing their past, they will be denying who they are. They desire to ar
ticulate their feelings, their concerns, and their assumptions about the nature
of reality in th eir p articu lar cultures without being treated as marginal,
minor, or insignificant participants. Often referred to as subaltern writers
a term used by the M arxist critic Antonio Gramsci to refer to those classes
who are not in control o f a culture's ideology (hegemony)these theorists-
au th ors-critics p ro v id e new w ays to see and understand the cultural
forces at w ork in society, in literature, and in ourselves. Although the liter
ary theory and accom p anying criticism of each cultural studies approach
is ongoing, an o v erv iew o f the central tenets of the first of this group
postcolonialism w ill en ab le us to understand its distinctive visions of
literature's p u rp oses in tod ay's ever-changing world.
O S T C O L O N IA L IS M : " T H E E M P IR E W R IT E S B
spelling is acceptable, but
ostcolonialism (or p o st-co lo n ia lism e urnpfjons) consists of a set of
ach represents slightly different theoretics1 ^ jjterary analysis that are
heories in philosophy and various app coUntries that were or s 1
oncemed with literature written in Eng is
H ISTO RIC A L D EV ELO PM EN T
Rooted in colonial power and prejudice postcolonialism develops from .

fnm-rtunisand-vear history of strained cultural relations betw een colonies in
Africa and Asia and the Western w orld. T h rou gh ou t this long history, the
West became the colonizers, and many African and A sian countries and their
peoples became the colonized. During the nineteenth century, Great Britain
emerged as the largest colonizer and imperial pow er, quickly gaining control
of almost one quarter of the earth s landm ass. By the m iddle of the nine
teenth century, terms such as colonial interests and the B ritis h Empire were
widely used both in the media and in governm ent policies and international
politics. Many British people believed that Great Britain w as destined to rule
the world. Likewise, the assumption that W estern Europeans and, in partic
ular, the British people were biologically superior to any other racea term
for a class of people based on physical a n d /o r cu ltu ral distinctions
remained relatively unquestioned.
Such beliefs directly affected the w ays in w hich the colonizers treated the
colonized. Using its political and economic strength, Great Britain, the chief
imperialist power of the nineteenth century, dom inated her colonies, making
them produce and then give up their countries' raw materials in exchange for
what material goods the colonized desired or w ere m ade to believe they de-
sired by the colonizers. Forced labor of the colonized became the rule of the
day, and thus the institution of slavery w as commercialized. Often the colot*'
justified their cruel treatment of the colonized by invoking Europe ^
gious beliefs. From the perspective of m any white Westerners, the pe Lthat
Africa, the Americas, and Asia were "heathens," possessing PaSan dQeSno1
must be Christianized. How one treats peoples w ho are so defin6 ^ ^ t0 the
really matter, they maintained, because m any W esterners subscri
colonialist ideology that all races other than white w ere inferior or eVil
These subhumans or "savages" quickly becam e the inferior an S erS" are e*
Others, a philosophical concept called alterity whereby " ttie , ^feri^
eluded from positions of power and view ed as both different an
Chapter 1 0 Postcolonialism 201
By the early twentieth century Eneh.n v
ideological dom ination of its colonies b e ^ l ^ PO,îtia,,' economic, and
as decolonization. By mid century for exV i d,8"PPea*Va process known
pendence from British colonial rule M am/1 u , ia had 8*ned htr ind^
marks the beginning of postcolonHIiu . ,lars b<fli*ve that this event
coined by the French dem ographer Alfred th ,rd "w or,d studies, a term
independence, the former British rolnnv aU,Vy'. When India received her
India Union and Pakistan. This D a rtiH n n ^ 8 d V,dcd into two nations, the
D ivide/' led to ethnic conflict of e n o r m o ..^ 8 ' What scho,ars dub the "Great
m e m b e r o f th e British C o m m o n w e a lth in C ^ T bt'tw een Incli'< new
of Pakistan. H un d red s of thousands of I T ' j j !! OStly Mus,im 8,a,e
the o u tr a g e o f a v a s t a r r a y o f s c h o la rs J r i P * d / .the stru8gle' igniting
. m rtral r>rlif,Vd a turs, w riters, and critics co n cern in g the so*
' ^w h at w e ' d ,?Cj n miC conditons of the aftereffects of colonial
ism in w h at w ere once called third-world countries.
The beginnings of postcolonialism 's theoretical and social concerns can
be traced to the 1950s. A long w ith India's independence, this decade wit-
nessed the ending of France s long involvement in Indochina; the parting of
the w ays b etw een the tw o leading figures in existential theory, Jean-Paul
Sartre an d A lb ert C am u s, o ver their differing views about Algeria; Fidel
Castro's n ow -fam ous "H istory Shall Absolve M e" speech; and the publica
tion of F ran tz F an o n 's Black Skin, W hite Masks (1952) and Chinua Achebe's
novel T h in g s F a ll A p a rt (1958).
The follow ing decades witnessed the publication of additional key texts
that articulated the social, political, and economic conditions of various sub
altern groups. In 1960, the Caribbean writer George Lamming published The
Pleasures o f E xile , a text in which Lamming critiques William Shakespeare's
play The Tempest from a postcolonial perspective. The next year Fanon pub
lished The W retched o f the E a rth (1961), a work that highlights the tensions or
binary oppositions of w hite versus black, good versus evil, and rich versus
poor, to cite a few. O ther w riters, philosophers, and critics such as Albert
Memmi con tin u ed publishing texts such as The Colonizer and the Colonized
(1965, English version) that w ould soon become the cornerstone of postcolo
nial theory and w ritings. In particular, postcolonialism gained the/aention
of the West w ith the publication of Edward Said s Onenffl/ism (1978) and BiU
Ashcroft. G areth G riffiths, and Helen Tiffin's
W rites Back: T h e o ry a n d P ra ctice in P ost-C olonial Litera / b |(
publication of these tw o texts, the voices and the c a n c a n . ^ many subaltern
cultures w ould soon be heard in both aca eml aia :n scholarly jour-
The term s p o stco lo n ia l and ^ A sh cro ft, Griffiths, and
nals in the m id-1980s and as subtitles 1 -n 1990 in Ian Adam and
Tiffin's previously m entioned P ow er^ /z . Post. Colonialism and Post-
Helen Tiffin's P ast the L a st Post. Th ^ uacj become firmly estab-
Modernism. By the early and m id-1990s, bo
lished in academ ic and pop u lar discourse.
ta C M ' ' p o s tm o d e rn a p p r o a c h e s to ,
>lruction nnd <>th<T Jn)Rcneous field of study in '^
Simitar to d ^ m ri.f,.rs to 'l tivcs; post-colomahsm, postcolo^^
analysis, p o st^ m '^ ' several # ,r h phen (post-colonialism), ihe
even its ^ t n spelled ^ ^ from
ism. or ,w tM -"a , orcier-that a . h hcn (poslcolomalism), the t ^
implies a P n o m ' S ej without t ' P )th e r to resist colonialist
colonial state. W hen one w a y i? a tio n A *
refers'ho w n m jg d m t^ and after th e pe^1^ c o v e rs a w id e r c r i t i c a l ^
spectives, nonbyphenated p J than does the hyphenated SrW
mduding literature of former Bnhsh J ^ term (posi/colomai), argue ^
ing. The third orth<.graph.c v^ ious two f e llin g s because it stress**
critics, is more relevant an indeterminate number of hteratures-t*
the interrelatedness be ween ^ simitar situation: the entangled con-
they Anglophone or not .&l and post/co lo n ial discourse and be-
t^ n rny'lnd rost/coloniahty. Today the most common speiiing
,he o a,re.
t heeth
Theîrst^views postcolonialism as a set o f d iv e rs e m d o lotw o sbranct*s-
g ie that p<^
sess no unitary quality, as a rg u e d b y H o m i K . B h a b h a a n d Arun P.
Murkheriee. The second branch includes th o se c ritic s s u c h a s E d w a rd Said,
Barbara Harlow, and Gayatri C h ak ravo rty S p iv a k w h o v ie w postcolonialism
as a set of cultural strategies centered in h isto ry . T h is la tte r g ro u p can also
be subdivided into those w ho believe p o s tco lo n ia lis m re fe rs to th at period
after the colonized countries h ave gain ed th eir in d e p e n d e n c e as opposed to
those who regard postcolonialism as referrin g to all th e ch aracteristics of a
society or culture from the time of colo n izatio n to th e p re s e n t m om ent.
Postcolonialism's concerns becom e evid en t w h e n w e e x a m in e the various
topics discussed in one of its m ost p ro m in en t te x ts, T h e Post-Colonial Studies
Reader (1995), edited by Ashcroft, Griffiths, a n d Tiffin. Its sub jects include uni
versality, difference, nationalism , p o stm o d e rn ism , re p re s e n ta tio n and resis-
tance, ethnicity, feminism, language, ed u cation , h istory, p la ce , an d production.
s iverse as these topics are, they d raw atten tio n to p ostcolon ialism 's major
concern: the struggle that occurs w h en on e cu ltu re is d o m in a te d b y another.
tore'M n U* ire T T ' b e co lo n ized is " t o b e rem o v ed from his-
b o m ou t r n i z e d n T ! T ? P * 0 e x i s e " - P - t c o l o n i a l * e o ry i*
cu ltu ral clash es w ith the rc P ''S r u s tr a h o n s , th e ir d ire c t and persona
d ream s about th e7um re and , h T r m 8 C u U u re ' d h e ir fears, hopes, and
to ch an g es in ta n e m e e r ,eir ow n id entities. H o w th e colonized respo
8 fie. cu rricu la r m a tte rs in e d u c a tio n , race d i f f e r e n t
^hapter _ ..
economic issues, m orals, elhicn 10 * Pt*tcol<mialism ,
act of writing itself, b e co m e 1 'h " d ma"y other 203
practices of postcolonia lism . COnk'xt fr the including w
v,n8 theories and
a s s u m p t io n s
Because different cultures th a t h a v e h
Theory, a n d the W o r k S k
able ty p e o f th e o r y in th e s a m e sen se as d theory is not an identifi

an alysis o r f e m in is m ," L ik e m a n y critical t h e ^ s ^ T ' M a sm' psycho
in talk in g a s if c o n s e n s u s a b o u t w h a t n n ^ m i , ' H arnson sees no poin
ally e m e r g e ." W e c a n , h o w e v e r, high ligh t n o Z I Sh^ ies; is'm igh t evcntu.
All p o s tc o lo n ia lis t c ritic s b e lie v e th e followine- nia lsm s ma)or concerns
4o*
European colonialism did occur.
The British Empire was at the center of this colonialism.
. The conquerors dominated not only the physical land but also the hegemony or
ideology of the colonized peoples.
The social, political, and economic effects of such colonization are still being
felt today.
At the center of postcolonial theory exists an inherent tension among

three categories of postcolonialists: (1) those who have been academically
trained and are living in the West, (2) those who were raised in non-Westem
cultures but now reside in the West, and (3) those subaltern writers living
and writing in non-W estern cultures. For example, on the one hand, critics
such as Fredric Jam eson and Georg M. Gugelberger come from a European
and American cultural, literary, and scholarly ba^kF Und^ n. ^ ^
that includes Spivak, Said, and Bhabha wer^ raê n n an o th e r eroup
but have or now reside, study, and write in the es . n s5 ^ cultures,
includes writers such as Aijaz Ahmad who live an wor h three
Differing theoretical and practical criticism
groups. O u t o f th is u n d e rly in g ten sion am o g g problem atic topics for
rists an d c ritic s h a v e a n d w ill c o n tin u e to d iscov er p
exp loration a n d d e b a te . , j th eo rists is Frantz Fanon
H is to ric a lly o n e o f th e e a r lie s t p o s co Fanon fought with the
(1925-1961). B o m in th e F re n c h co lo n y o f M qthe' war to study m edicine
French in W o rld W a r II, re m a in in g in F ra n ce and ^ Fanon provides
and p sych iatry. T h ro u g h o u t h is ra th e r s o r , skin , White Masks (19 an
Postcolonialism w ith tw o in flu en tial texts.
>nialsrn
C M * * 10 ' r ,,a,U ' ......" , th cse an d o th e r w o r k s F a n o n u ses ps
10* , r ,r,h (1461). In (hL"ftk m o f b la c k s u n d e r F re n ch color/-,
W r v l c lu-dof the E ine the c o " d th a t b o t h th e co lo n iz ed (e .g'
The v w ; to exam - asser
"d iffe r e n t fr o m ) a n d th e coloni-* '
rule. AS a person d c m - 3 ing what Fanon describes a s
,lu. Other that >9' X * oftentim es c u a s ,h e co lonized (the black
suffer " P 7 ^ CeI "PFanon b e lie v e th . , h e la n g u a g e o f the colonize,
collapse of the b were forced to P re COerced into accepting tb
S sin and W h ite

S n ^ wdh pur - that an entirely
! 7 new
- World
m The Wretched of the Earth, r binary system in which black is evil
must come into being to overcom *hM ist_jnfluenced postcolonial theory
and white is good. Fanon develops a M # ^ rf revolu,ion in which
in which he calls for violent r a participant and a spokesperson for
himself was involved when n France. H e also develops in T
the Algerian revolutions 8 concems: the problem of the "native
Wretched i ' ^ t o r t h wer after the colonial powers have either peace-
bourgeoisie who P ^ when such a situation occurs, the native
prolemriat/'the wretched of the ea rth ," are le ft o n th e ir ow n , often in a
worse situation than before the conquerors arriv ed . T h ro u g h o u t h,s writ-
ings, Fanon articulates key postcolonial concerns su ch as O therness, sub
ject formation, and an emphasis on lin g u istic an d p sy ch o a n a ly tic frame
works on which postcolonialism will develop in the d ecad es to follow.
Another key text in the establishment of postcolonial theory is Orientalism
(1978), authored by Edward Wadie Said (19352003). A Palestinian-American
theorist and critic, Said was bom in Jerusalem , w here h e liv ed w ith his family
until the 1948 Arab-lsraeli War, at w hich tim e h is fam ily becam e refugees in
Egypt and then Lebanon. Educated at P rin ceton and H arv ard Universities,
Said taught at Johns Hopkins University, where, as a professor, he authored a
variety of texts, including Orientalism, his m ost influential. In this work Said
chastises the literary world for not investigating and taking seriously the study
o co omzation or imperialism. He then develops several concepts that are cen
tred ^b^- ! eorY- ^ ccording to Said, nineteenth-century Europeans
called Oriental* ^ ^ ritoria concluests by propagating a manufactured belief
si7a1led O n 7 , I : ' 7 ? f " " " European stereotypes that suggested
and demented The m ttlouS^tless/sexu ally im m oral, unreliable,
Said notes' beiieved * * r r
East." What they failed to r ltants ^heir n ew ly acquired lands in 1 e
be viewed only through nn arÛes âid ,is that all hum an knowledge can
No theory, either political o rlit P ltlCal' Cultural' and ideological framewor
colonizers were revealing w Can be totallY objective. In effect, wha
domination, not the nature of Fb ^ Unconsci us desires for power, wealth,
mature o f the co lo n ized su b jects.
Chapter lo *
In C u ltu re and Im perialism ( 19 9 3 ^ Said ostcol onialis
unionization a n d im p erialism : " T h e v ' J captures the ba*\n 205
serve to b e ru le d ." T h e co lo n ized . Said maiht US/ and t h a l ? ' behind

m e H e n c e , th e e s ta b lis h e d b in a ry o DDn ,tains' becmes th e O n /34. dt'
m ust b e ab o lish ed a lo n g w ith its intricate w e b o ^ M West"/"th e O.'her'
dices. W h a t m u s t b e rejected . Said declares, is the a" d " % < p re f
ers w h o w a n t to d e scrib e th e O rien t from a panoram' mentality of writ-
view o f h u m a n ity c re a te s a sim plistic interpretaH ( k ' ' This errvous
must b e re p la c e d b y o n e b a sed on "n arrative," a t o Z Z S T . exPCTte" -
sizes th e v a r ie ty o f h u m a n exp erien ces in all cultnr..c TK hat emPha-
d oes n o t d e n y d iffe re n c e s , b u t presents the!n in VieW
S ch o larsh ip , a s s e r ts S aid , m u s t b e derived from firsthand e x ^ c e ^ a
p articu lar re g io n , g .v m g v o ice and presence to the critics who live and write
in th ese re g io n s, n o t sch o larsh ip from "afar" or secondhand representation
A lth ou gh s u c h id e a s h elp ed sh ap e the central issues of postcolonial theory, it
w as S a id 's u s e o f F r e n c h "h ig h th e o ry " along with Marxist ideology as
a m e th o d o lo g y to d e c o n s tru c t an d historically examine the roots of
O rien talism th a t a ttra c te d th e attention of the academic world and helped
inspire a n e w d ire ctio n in postcolonial thought.
H o m i K . B h ab h a (1 9 4 9 ), on e of the leading postcolonial theorists and
rritics b u ild s o n S a id 's co n ce p t of the Other and Orientalism. Bom into a
Pars! fam ily' in M u m b a i, India,' Bhabha received his undergraduate
-------* deg
uuuciîauucue uegree in
dt. and h i . m aster', and dm-rnml d ------- -------------
India and his m a ster's and doctoral degrees from Oxford University. Having
taught at several prestigious universities, including Princeton, Dartmouth,
and the U n iversity o f Chicago, Bhabha is currently a professor at Harvard
University. In w orks such as The Location o f Culture (1994), Bhabha empha
sizes the con cern s o f the colonized. What of the individual who has been col
onized? O n the one hand, the colonized observes two somewhat distinct
views of the w orld: that of the colonizer (the conqueror) and that of himself
or herself, the colonized (the one who has been conquered) To what culture
does this p erso n b elo n g ? Seem ingly, neither culture feels lik e!home TTus
fee.ing o f h o m e le s s n e s s , o f being
Bhabha calls unhom eliness, ai concep f ^ p(ion of abandonment
by som e p o stco lo m al theorists. Th , g(theP0i0nized) to become a psy-
by both cu ltures cau ses the colonia ) refugee uniquely blends his
chological refugee. Because each psyc o & Been colonial subjects will
or her tw o cu ltu res, no tw o w riters w Bhabha argues against the
interpret th eir cu ltu re (s) exactly a 1 e' . ^ t0 a homogenous
tendency to essen tialize third-w or co postcolonial studies is is eie
O ne o f B h ab h a's m ajor co n tn ^ " te ofPcolonial dominance, When W
that there is alw ays am bivalence a cbaracteristics of the na 7 (ension.
cultures com m ingle, the nature and ^ ^ a m i c , interactive, and tension-
culture changes each o f the cultures. Th ^ Bhabha himse Y
Packed p ro cess B h abh a nam es y
10* C lui'K 't 10 l, tcHU" i liSm , .. t.
,:.ltrv cultural, subjective process having
"hybridization is a discursive, auth(,R atio n deauthoriZatio *
to do With the struggle armii a S()cial process. It s not about persons 0f
and the revision of nuthon 5 ^ . ^ * As a result, says Bhabha, a feeling o{
u n iv ^ e liS lv e lo p s in ^ J ^ ' ^ m m i n g l c d culture, Bhabha's answer

For the colonized writer in sue colonized writer must create a new
to this sense of unhome m e s s ' d transcendental signifieds created by
discourse by rejecting all the es * * embrace pluralism, believing that no
the colonizers. Such a writer m exist. To accomplish such goals
single truth and no meta, !ep ^ /s ^ dônstruction theory to expos! cut
Bhabha consistently uses the tools
tural metaphors and discourse^ much of the theoretical frame-
Although Fanom Said and Bhabha^y them jn continu ^
w o rk o f postcoloniahsm, m any * th e o c c i d e n t " a n d " t h e O rie n t
dialogue between what bnaDna cans ^
Concentrating on what some critics call the "flows of culture, postcolonial-
ism divides into smaller theoretical schools identified by their choice of theo
retical background and methodology. Marxism, poststructuralism, feminism,
African-American, and psychoanalytic criticism (usually of the Lacanian va
riety) all influence postcolonial theory. For example, Gayatri Spivak, the pub
lisher of the English translation of Jacques Derrida's O f Grammatology (1976),
is a feminist, postcolonial critic who applies deconstructive interpretations of
imperialism while simultaneously questioning the premises of the Marxism,
feminism, and Derridean deconstruction that she espouses.
Postcolonialism is a varied approach to textual analysis that assumes that
literature, culture, and history all affect each other in significant ways.
Postcolonial critics also believe in the unavoidability of subjective and polit
ical interpretations in literary studies, arguing that criticism and theory must
be relevant to society as it really is. As such, these critics maintain that colo
nialism was and is a cause of suffering and oppression, a cause that is inher
ently unjust Furthermore, colonialism is not a thing of the past, but contin
ues to ay owbeit in subtler and less open waysas a form of oppression
writp<?SinUpn^m/USt e opPosed- As the contemporary critic Sam Durrant
n Z t U f m t m and ,he Work f M ournin g (2003), "Post-colo-
a Simple r e s o r t81Sgrounded >n an aPPeal to an ethical universal entailing
Suffering and enslavement's^ nda fundamental revolt a8ainst' ?
and are "simply wrong." ' Y P stcoloniallstsâre elements of oppression
METHODOLOGY
Like many schools of critir

' ,eX,Ui" ana)yB. Deconstructionrn'a^.Srn
' Lm nism USeS a va
, M a rx ism , 'y <
reader-orie
Chapter 1 ( 1 . Pmteoloniali.m
207
criticism, African-American criticism, and cultunl ... r
colonial theories in their critical methodologies r ' i(| d,CS emP1y post-
S Z a c h e s or "strains" of pos.col.mial c r i t i c i s m ? 1,d7*y *wo major
jJftcoloni.il theory. Those who engage in postcolnnf 1 ?.?'? crillcism a"d
in which texts bear the traces of
such texts as challenging or promoting the colonizer'.1" 8y and lntt'rprel
mony More frequently than no,.
analyze canonical texts from colonizing countries. Postcoloâl h eo ^ 'o n
the other hand, moves beyond the bounds of traditional literary '
investigates social, political, and economic concerns of the col
(he colonizer. No matter which methodology a postcolonial
choose, it matters greatly whether or not the theorist/critic has been a colc^
nial subject. Those who have been the subjects of colonization ask them
selves a somewhat different set of questions than those postcolonialists who
have not.
The person living and writing in a colonized culture poses three signifi
cant questions:
1. Who am I?
2. How did I develop into the person I am?
3. To what country or countries or to what cultures am I forever linked?
In asking and answering the first question, the colonized author is connect
ing himself or herself to historical roots. By asking and answering the second
question, the writer is admitting a tension between these historical roots and
the new culture or hegemony imposed on the writer by the conquerors. By
asking and answering the third question, the writer confronts the fact that he
or she is both an individual and a social construct created and shaped pri
marily by the dominant culture. The written works penned by these authors
will necessarily be personal and always political and ideological. Furthermore,
both the creation of a text and its reading may be painful and disturbing but
also enlightening. Whatever the result, the text will certainly be a message
sent back to the empire, telling the imperialists the effects of their coloniza
tion and how their Western hegemony has damaged and suppressed the ide
ologies of those who were conquered.
Postcolonialists are quick to point out that they do indeed make value
judgments about cultures, people, and texts. In turn, they as us, t eir rea
ers and critics, to examine carefully the standards against w ic we are ma
ing our value judgments. Said cautions us that "it is not necessary to regar
every reading or interpretation of a text as the moral equiva en o war, u^
whatever else they are, works of literature are not mere y _tex s
postcolonialists such as Said attempt to read a text in its fullest context being
Careful not to frame their analyses solely in academic iscourse. .
and oftentimes psychologically laden and complex theory highlights
# postcolonirtli&rn
208 Chi'P^r 1 . *
. , experienced colonial oppression to the ,
"writing b * * ><,h0^ j c o l o n i a l critics give such texts a close * < -
oniwr* and to the world ' * Such analysis questions the taW &
noting particularly the tix h " Western mindset. For exam n'
^ g ra n te d positions m in ed rather than exposing ^
how truth is constructed nmrt be e and attitudes can K of
S S S a S 3 flta E 5SSB&
to understand completely a subaltern group is impossible and can lead
another form of repression. How postcolonial criticism is actually put j
practice thus depends strongly on the critic s individual theoretical comm ,
ments. But all postcolonial criticism is united in its opposition to colonial
and neo-colonial hegemonies and its concern with the best way(s) to create
just and true decolonized culture and literature. a
When applying postcolonialist theory to a text, con sid er the following

hons. After examining each question, ask yourself w h at question*
propriately applied to Nathaniel H aw thorne's short sto ry Y o u 5 ap
Brown so you can view this tale from a postcolonialist perspeTtfve '
S ' 16 leXt Wh6n he lW '>ash, when one sees itself as
What d ^ hea^r e c T re CU,tUreS exhibited in the text. What does each value
Who in the text is "the Other"?
; Wha* the CUltUres?
culture? 68 tHe SUperi r or P h v ileg ercu h u re's1

How dn tK i . 8 mony affect the colonized
By the end of thTtexP Pt PlC View themselves Is the
* Wha, are the
What ,he ch,
Z 'T ' . . * * ' chan8e * * *
7 Chan8e
-like Differecp racleris,ics the language of ,h h.
Is the lane. n he *WO cultures? How are t
ue tanguage of the d
Suppression? dnunant culture a
In what ways is the r i ed as a form of oppress
f?*b
-a;:;h
e
:;t"rd
CU,tU
refe n c e d ?
colonizers? 8 nt f()rrns of postcolo , . .
How do gender 013 ldendty after the departure ol
- - t s of the t e ; ; r ' rSOCial âss function in th colonial

n the , and postcolorua
Chapter 10 . Postcolonialism 209
C RITIQ U ES a n d r espo n se
lik e other approaches to textual analysis, postmlnni r

nous school of literary theory and critidsm buf a 1 ,1Sr? 1S not a homoSe*
ries and methodologies that seeks to uncover anH r T * * Y deflned set of theo'
the colonized o nce they have been conquered bv th* 1fCover what haPPens to
chiefly deals with literature that h asleen written'f ^ re- Postclonialim
nized countries. Its aim is to examine what hac u y he co,onized ,n co,*
ana,yses by highlighting the i n t e r e s t
forces of the colon,zer s hegemony as forced on the colonized. As such p l t -
colomahsm becomes hke deconstruction, more of a reading strategy foan a
cod,fled school o f hterary cm ,a sm . In its methodology, it gives authority
and presence to the Other, the people who have become the separate ones
and who stand apart from the dominant, colonizing culture. And its goal is
to win back a place in history for the colonized, enabling all readers to value
the many different kinds of cultures and peoples who inhabit the earth.
Whether the postcolonial critic embraces the tenets of feminism, psycho-
analysis, Marxism, or any other theoretical framework, such a critic empha
sizes each person's humanity and right to personal freedom.
Some critics of postcolonialism point out that many of its most influential
spokespersons have been and continue to be educated in the West and are,
therefore, products of the Western mindset, not subaltern cultures. How can
such "Westem"-minded individuals speak for subaltern cultures? Other critics
observe that postcolonial studies remains situated in academia, in the "upper
classes" of society, having little or no effect on real people in real places. Can ac
ademic discussions, assert these critics, bring any change to subaltern cultures
and their peoples? If postcolonialism seeks to help and to change the lives of
colonized peoples, some of its critics argue that its reading strategies and
methodologies must be performed by those who have been colonized, not by
academics living in the West. Postcolonialism must, therefore, seek to empower
those who have been stripped of power, dignity, and self-worth, maintain some
critics, rather than continually marginalizing the colonized through iscourse
that can be understood by only the culturally elite. Perhaps, say these critics,
postcolonialism is radical in only its words, not in life-changing power.
Like most theories and methodologies grouped un er t e ea mg o
cultural studies, postcolonialism is becoming more an ore: '
including Caribbean, Latin American, and Pacific geograp ica r g ,
although some traditional postcolonial sites such as n 1a remain i P
By embracing a variety of theories and approaches to textual analj^s,^post-
colonialism has ensured its place in literary theory and prac 1 Y
docades to romp * *
See Readings on L it e r a l Criticism at the back of the text for a ke=
n the overall purpose of a postcolonial rea m g o ' rson
Ethnocentrism: The Idea of Universality in Literature, y
.ftMEmCAN CB.T.C.SH
A F R IC A N
$ness this s e n s e o f alw a y s looking at

It is . peculiar sensation, this d^ le^ Z m g one's soul b y the tape o f a w orld
s selfthroughthe eyes 0/ others- 0/ m
rta, S o n ," a m u s e d contempt and ptty.
w. E. B. DuBois, T h e Soul o f D ouble Consciousness
he mowing interest in postcolonialism in A m erican literary theory

T during the late 1970s to the present helped propel a renew ed interest
in the works of African-American writers and A frican-A m erican literary
theory and criticism. To say that postcolonialism or o th er postmodern
theories initiated African-American theory and criticism w ould be inaccu
rate. Like all schools of criticism, this body of theory and criticism has been
evolving over time since the publication of the earliest African-American
literature, poems written by the A frican-A m erican au thors Jupiter
Hammon (1711-1806) and Phillis Wheatley (1753-1784). Prom the publica
tion of these poets' works to the w ritings of con tem p orary African-
Americans, African-American criticism challenges established ideologies,
racial boundaries, and racial prejudice. It also acknow ledges and incorpo
rates the writings of past and often suppressed and forgotten African-
American literature, the major historical m ovem ents that have influenced
African-American writings, and both h isto rical and cu rrent attitudes
toward African-Americans themselves. Since the em ergence of Derrideai
deconstruction and other poststructuralist theories, African-American crit
icism requently employs binary oppositions, view ing the white America
as the oppressor of black art and black people. Its strong historical sen*
,ts understanding of rac.al issues, and its con cep t of w hat being Blue
means combine to create a school of criticism that is unique, multifacete
and ever growing. n
210
Chapter 11 A f.
fncan-American Criticism 211
H IST O R IC A L D E V E L O P M E N T , A SSU M P T IO mc
a n d M ETH O DOLOGY 1 T I N S ,
Without question, the twentieth century gave _

African-American literature and literary criticism Th dramatic '^crease in
African-American works directly influences Am", 6 lncreased Presence of
same time the culture is influencing the literal,,,C^ CU,tUre wbile at the
cem s, and the critiques of the earliest African A m / : Th<? Wntlngs' the con'
the body of criticism that has d ev elo p ^ ^
America. P
^ 07
^ f reShad W
past three centuries in
Sin ce its b e g in n in g s , A frica n -A m e rica n literature ,
enslavement of the blacks in colonial America by white Wesi b y the
and the suppression of the black race 3 % Z
Phillis Wheatley, one of the first prominent African-American poets in early

Amenca, embodies the effects of slavery in American literature; in American
culture, and in the personal life of one of America's earliest poets
On August 3, 1761, the following advertisement appeared in the Boston
Evening Post:
To Be Sold
A parcel of likely Negroes, imported from Africa, cheap for cash, or short
credit. Enquire near the South Market; Also, if any Persons have any Negro
Men, they may have an exchange for small Negroes.
Among this group o f sm all Negroes stood a frail, seven-year-old child who
would soon be g iv en the na me Phillis W heatley by her new owners, the
Wheatleys. Recognizing Phillis's innate intelligence, Susannah Wheatley, the
wife of a p ro sp ero u s B oston tailor and Phillis's "ow ner," encouraged
Phillis's intellectual endeavors, and in a little more than sixteen months after
her "adoption" by the W heatleys, Phillis had mastered English, memorized
many passages from the Bible, and was well on her way to fluency in several
classical languages. Because she was a brilliant conversationalist, Phillis fre
quently accom panied her ow ners on the circuit of Boston social events. By
her own choice, she never sat at the same dining tables as her owners an
their peers but requested a side table where she would eat alone. She wou d
similarly spend the m ost sign ificant part of her life in iso ation rom o
whites and blacks, h e r m o st frequ en t com pany being the works of the
eighteenth-century British w riters.
By thirteen, Phillis published her first poem with many mo '
" 1770, the p u b licatio n o f h er poem w ritten in .memory of
êverend, and Pious G eorge W hitefield" propel e er o * Loncjon and
^ o n and the colonies. At age tw enty-three, she traveled to London a ^
I'as greeted as the "S a b le M u se ," finding h erself in th q(
en)amm Franklin, co u n ts and cou ntesses, and even
212 Chapter 11 African-American C n tic *
, pd edition of h er poem s, Poems on

t Ann W hile in London, the co ^ ^ a s published, the first pub,
London. W hile >n and M()ra, ( i f f both her British and
S I u l e of p o e is * ^ 5^ unbelievable that a h la ct
Am erican audience w ould fin d it sta 8 (ace to h er collected poems
woman could write ^ e l g ^ dist^.ngu.shed fBoston,ans.
contained the testimony of no le authenticity of her w ork
including lohn Hancock, attesting continued to publish her poems,
Upon her return to Amenca W hea V inent Americans as George
w ith h er w ork being praised by s c " j lioned how a black wom an could
Washington. Many people, h o w e v e r ^ leading to her being taken to
be so intelligent as to w n tesu ch j;<x> P ^ h ef ow n ersh ip of her poems,
court so that she would be f o r c e d ' p ocm s in such preshg.ous
Wheatley won her case and continues, r
publications as the Pemsylvama M
a
gK
rd cd h er fr
P Upon the death of her ow ners F h d l t s w ^ phm is and , ohn
married a free black, John P e W ->8" d e lu d in g the deaths of all three
faced numerous struggles in th e n "> 8^ an d unable to publish any
of their children in chi dhooa. in fof, a com m on negro boarding-
poems, Phillis took employment as I husbandi Phillis Wheatley died
house." In 1774, soon after the drain or
inPr reLmfn0ahonUo!w hea.ley-s life highlights the multiple concerns of

contemporary African-American criticism.
Social!^political, economic, ideological, and liâry t0

. The historical and cultural significance of the black experience
African language and culture
Celebratine that which is black in black art
. The significance of slavery as a historical event and its present- ay ra
. Reading'race into all American literature because whiteness is the Other' of

blackness.
Like Wheatley and the many other black Americans who would pen word
t s s s s i' s r * * *
Jupiter Hammon^ aidhoô^the" r i r s t r3Fh i Wer e indeed feW
"An Evenine Thoutrhf- c 1 , poem published by a black American
and Ignatius Sancho (1729^7801^ th Penitential Cries" <176i;
praised Wheatlev's nnetrv u he f,rst African-American critic wh,
Mure d e v e l o p t h T . ^ ^ c e d Am 18 S f WaCk
Written by former slaves th . American culture: slave narratives
y mer slaves, the autob.ographical slave narrative recounts a.
Chal>,* li . Afrl
21.1
ividual's p e rso n a l life asa sla ve m nl i
% * *>*v e n n m ,,iv c w o ; ,s<-d b y * , S , ' r vW " ' * * !* to ,
l * " r" S'/," ' G,r/ < ,8(>l) a n d F iw d ^ * k" ^ lu<,<t Hrri,., 'S X t 7 ,
**** (1845)- Lik^ Wheatlov n M' w u ? *! ? '" *9
f h e a u t h o r o f h i s w o rk
because m a n y w hite A 388 W as a b u se d 0f n T
! Hack m an w as capable o f su c h disHnc..- ^ m ericans could not u bc,n
' P " " th* P s,- C v il W ar
continued t o w rite n o n fic tio n w o rk s c o n c e rn ^ ' A frlC an*Am erican a u th <
A m e r i c a n s i n A m e r i c a . O n e o f the p rom in ? m g the c n d ition o f A f ^
aUt h o r o f a colle ctio n o f e ssa y s t i t l e d T / i e V w as VV. E B D u B e '
f o u n d i n g m em ber o f the N A A C P m /S ^
Advancem ent o f C o lo re d People. A sso cia tio n fo ^
gays CH'B o is , is the p rob le m o f the c o lo r-lin e ^ c S il^ K tWentieth century/'
argues DuBois, can African-Americans fight X >l y
Another prominent African-Am erican writer fnH ^ e(*Uahty and justice
Booker T. W a sh in gto n , fo u n d e r o f the T u s k J Z eTd u c a t o r this era is
author of l/p/mm SLm ery (1901) and M y Lamer J L? in A l a b a m a a n d
U n lik e D u B o i s ,W a s h i n g t o n a
within the an A len can s m ust w ork
s o c ia l, p o litic a l, a n d e d u c a t io n a l
the dom inant w h ite culture. B o rro w in g the w a*ready e s t a b l i s h e d b y
Washington maintains that African-Americans shonlH '
ow n b o o tstra p s" b e f o r e thev ask for c ^ - . ld pick themselves up
b y th eir
A fric a n -A m e rica n lite ra tu re L d , ff r p li,ica ljusti -
throughout the 1920s and '3 0 s in large Dart h*JL1Sm (\ontinued to develop
era ture and art. w h a , becam e k n o X s the
and m u sician s gathered together i n t e r n ' ^ d X t ^ T r ic a X

Am erican culture, g iv in g to A frica n -A m n rm , n / ea A frjcan-
being black. F o r a sh o rt tim e H arlem became the id e a h X X n f e r o f h o p j X
frican A m ericans a h o p e t h a t e n v i s i o n e d t h a t o n e d a y t h e y , l i k e t h e i r w h i t e
counteârts, w o u ld receive e q u a l r i g h t s u n d e r t h e la w . U n d e r t h e e ^ t o r -
,hip of D u B o is, the C r i s i s , t h e j o u r n a l o f t h e N A A C P , e c h o e s t h i s cry for
r % , 8 t h a t a r t f U ld i beCOme a t00] 111 the s t r u S 8 l e { o r so Ciafjus-
y-s i s P r o P a 8 d a a n d e ver m u st b e " a r g u e d t h e w r i t e r s o f t h e
" r ] : d *he 8 reat m issi n o f the N e g r o to A m e r i c a a n d to t h e m odern
>nm f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f A r t a n d t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n o f B e a u t y ." T h i s d e v e l -
- L lf n d Africar|-A m e rican art and culture w as best articulated in the
n hie n fn,a,SSance b y w r i t e r , p h i l o s o p h e r , a n d e d u c a t o r A l a i n L e R o y L o c k e
ne th0J 8 y o f A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n w r i t e r s , N e w N e g r o ( 1 9 2 5 ) . I n t h e
Tbe N e w N e g r o ," L o c k e p r e s e n t s h is u n d e r s t a n d in g
ack c u lt u r e a n d a r g u e s th a t th e u n it e d A fr ic a n -A m e r ic a n s o f th e
214 Ch4,.l.r 11 African-American Criticism
. ., irl(im are becoming a "progressive force" in _ .

North, aiul especially with whites. Locke argues that the^T^'
leading toward blac 1 Y h )|()y" and a "new spirit " êvv
Negro" as w J S l *
siety Throughout the Harlem Renaissance, Locke s use of the ,erm * *

^ b e c a m e synonymous with those who refused to submtt to the
Crow laws, both state and local laws enacted m the Un.ted States betw^j
1876 and 1965. These laws maintained racial segregation in all pubhc faciJ
ties, including schools, transportation, restrooms restaurants, and even
drinking fountains. The New Negro openly protested against such dehu.
manizing legislation, advocating dignity for all African-Americans.
The two leading literary figures of the Harlem Renaissance are Langston
Hughes and Zora Neale Hurston. Novelist, dramatist, short story writer
translator, children's author, and poet Langston Hughes (1902-1967) became
famous with the publication of his poem The Negro Speaks of Rivers" in
1921. Unlike Alain Locke and other African-Americans arguing for social
equality by embracing the qualities of what Hughes dubbed "whiteness "
Hughes asserts that African-Americans should embrace their blackness and
their cultural integrity, qualities Hughes sees in lower-class black life, not the
middle or upper classes. By embracing their blackness, says Hughes
African-Americans must recognize the importance of their music, especially
jazz. For Hughes, jazz "is one of the inherent expressions of Negro life in
America: the eternal tom-tom beating in the Negro soul the tom-tom of re
volt against weariness in a white world, the tom-tom of joy and laughter,
and pain swallowed in a smile." The other leading figure of the Harlem
Renaissance, Zora Neale Hurston (1891-1960), agrees with Hughes. Author
of more than fourteen books, Hurston wrote Their Eyes Were Watching God
(1937), a work dubbed an "African American feminist classic" and "one of
the very greatest American novels in the twentieth century." Like Hughes,
Hurston usually avoids fiction of protest, choosing to write literature that
affirms the black consciousness. Because she did not author protest fiction
and because of her gender, her works received little attention until the 1970s,
/\i.en 1 *7^1 l, ^ *cton was rediscovered" by the American author/poet
Alice Waêr author of The Color Purple, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for
. * , ,/ n a er is a leading African-American feminist who intro-
Creft he W rd Womamst in hterary criticism, a term that highlights the per
spectives and experiences of "women of color "
1930?anHW C<?TLn;8 /T^ Great DeP^ssion in the late 1920s and early
Ren^k d W r d War 11 in the 1940s' the ideals that sparked the Harlem
T Were q K ' bUt not before the writings and music of African-
Amencans were embraced by mainstream American culture. After fights
their country as d.d white men and women, black men returned home
from the war to face mounting racism in the South. Leaving the Southern
^
\ Chapter 11 Afrit,
an-Ameri<an Criticism 2IS
Vvjf, captures in his prose what it is like to be black in an intensely per-

^ al way- Baldwin believed that America was in a process of being, not an
^ vej . at entity. In his vision or aesthetics, he addresses the problems of
*rrI social justice in American democracy while attempting to create a
r^ ld that transcends such inequity. For Baldwin, like Wheatley and other
J " Tsts before him, alienation from both white and black society was the
*' art" a time when being black and homosexual were suspect identities,
oi -iwin was both. Authoring more than eighteen works, Baldwin found no
? ftme in American society of the 1950s.
- ^ Unlike Baldwin, Richard Wright (1908-1960), another literary voice for
.. ^.Americans, embraces Marxist principles and opts to change the soci-
^ which he lives. Author of N ative Son (1940), The Outsider (1953), and
' J hlte Man, Listen! (1957), Wright was a novelist, essayist, and activist who
e
^ Uf>l -ed that "Negro writers must accept the nationalist implications of their
lives not in order to encourage them, but to change and transcend them." In
1 his works, Wright asserts that the African-American writers should concen
trate their talents on describing the material conditions of black, not white,
life in American society. The ideology of the black working classes, not the
white upper classes, must be embraced. What this means for the writer, says
Wright is an interaction with, not an isolation from, society. The act of writ
ing is asocial act that should bring about change for the better in the lives of
bik s. For Wright, writing should highlight the oppression of blacks and
must
liLU Jt become at radical agent
l/WV/Jitiv v ^_ of social change. . , , , ___
Arguably the greatest literary work of this time is Ralph Ellison's only
novel, Invisible M an (1953). In this work and in Ellison's collections of essays,
Shadow and A ct (1966) and G oing to the Territory (1986), Ellison (1914-1994) as
serts that in America race is the central and most profound issue. Unlike
Wright, Ellison argues that literature, especially the novel, should be a place
of experimentation and speculation, where various ideas could be examined
and pondered. For Ellison, literature is not politics nor is it a bully pulpit to
advocate social change. Texts m ust engage their culture but not be primarily
agents of change. African-American art, Ellison declares, must be written
fHd analyzed with the same literary and cultural sophistication as any other
fond of art.
,n the ongoing developm ent of African-A m erican literature and c ' ^
dsm, the black arts movement provides a radical change in ire
i
. n Cr^cism
.. . , ifrican-American scho\ar-crttic
M * 1" , '50s. T' ' C,,he -short
, ,. 0st, move^11' L bUlck arts movement sp,n
u t.,, )r.,# '",1 history-Tt^' d with the assassinationc
Vlemy Loins^ ,icn cuj>u be(.l0nii'K<* ^ tbe philosophy oi the s
till" in V)b510 UulicaV btUnHch power-that is, militant Of
ad-
,heaecailcfn'';ruary ^ a tenewal and pride in
MalcolmX mf nrovennn t w,c inp>,nlf beauty of all thingsblack.
Civil Rightsen . scM.de(ensc 0dness a wicb Village beat poet
s. sTheinnovemem
Cricket. ^ s s liuli
3 S
rs s tt >., ..........
,. ~ltw-K na
tion, and its literary goal was to descri e an e in a
racist white society
from one based on shame Decause ui ^ un Deing
proud of everything black, especially skin color Although the black arts
movement produced a variety of literary works by writers such as Nikki
Giovanni (Block Feeling, Black Folk, 1967) and Soma Sanchez (Homecoming,
1969), its existence was short lived. Its visionary gleam and its major strength
were also its major weakness, alienating African-Americans from other seg
ments of society by attempting to establish its own black nation and making
blacks a group of people seemingly standing apart from history.
What African-American literature and criticism needed was a theoretical
framework on which to base its criticism. Throughout the first seven decades
of the twentieth century, African-American writers wrote texts depicting
African-Americans interacting with their culture. These American subaltern
writers concerned themselves mainly with issues of nationalism and the ex
posure of the unjust treatment of African-Americans a suppressed, re
pressed, and colonized subculture at the hands of their white conquerors
Their writings highlight such themes as the African-American's search for
personal identity; the bitterness of the struggle of black men and women in
America to achieve political, economic, and social success; and both mild
and militant pictures of racial protest and hatred. What these authors gave to
America were personal portraits of what it meant to be a black writer strug
gling with personal, cultural, and national identity.
While literature authored by black writers was gaining in popularity
throughout the twentieth century, it was being interpreted through the lens
of the dominant culture, a lens that was focused on one colorwhite, the
dominant element in the binary opposition white/black, as Derrida would
soon explain. A black aesthetics had not yet been established, and critics and
theorists alike applied the principles of Western metaphysics and Western
hermeneutics to this ever-evolving and steadily increasing body of litera-
ture. Although theoretieal and critical essays authored by DuBois, Hughes,
Wright, and Ellison announced to the literary world that black literature was
a distinctive literary practice with its own aesthetics and should not be
ChilP
da bbeda subcategory o r a fri>*n-4 n , .

thelte 1 9 7 0 s a n d t h e 1 980s t h t u 'e of A iw C r" o , m
tin ctive c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f A frib
*. ,a<* t h e n n
im p o r t a n t g r o u p o f l i t e r a r y cr h P '^ r 'c a n T-I* bl8an tT ' no,
and Henry Louis Gates, Jr. >,cs->* ' " a (Ure
n ,e f o u n d i n g e d ito r fC
ouh L'1'*
jhe m ost in flu e n tia l p o stcn l C r it in , ^ 'J " nM oh\
university o f C a l i f o J Z ^ ' * W .
scholarly a r t i c l e s an d t e x t s h i J r 7 ' h n ^ o h a t Pr ^ s 0r is one Gf
ary c r it ic is m . R a i s e d i n K e n x , 8 7 8 b t i r >g t h e , ed h^s auf. f nghsh af f
a n 'A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n ) , ^ *
ism a nd c o l o n i a l m e t h o d s t h a t a T * ^ e s s e T f ^ ' ^ Z b v s ^ 0 1 ' ^ 7-
H {tilt* ---
eliminate
elim in ate the
mv. vital
____ elements
________ _ _ ofZed
th e uominafe, quell a ^ * -
studying the e f f e c t s o f colonization ' ' u' u," 2ea t'
- ........ the co'on1 culture H nd 0,hl
culture . sesn ,___
n e has hjs U h
dynamics of both the conqueror and m terbvined baS Spent his , i f e
tanceishis text Manichean Aesthetics- Th. n --------? socia
(------
1 9 8 3 ), in,lV
whichh hp
hearffUM
arg u esthat
literature authored by the colon,
in c Z n i u U f r 0 *
in Kenya and A frican -A m erican s in Am erica, for example) is more ta tm s h
^ for .ts n o em ah e v a l u e - t h e com plexities of the world it re v e a ls lto n ^ o r
jts noetic or subjective qualities concerning what it perceives. JanMohamed
delineates the an tag o n istic relationship that develops between hegemonic
and nonhegemonic literature. In African-Am erican literature, for example
he notes that black w riters such as Richard Wright and Frederick Douglass
were shaped by their p erson al socioeconom ic conditions. At some point in
their developm ent as w riters and as persons who were on the archetypal
journey of self-realization, these w riters became "agents of resistance" and
were no longer w illing to "co n sen t" to the hegemonic culture. According to
JanMohamed, at som e p oin t, subaltern writers will resist being shaped by
their oppressors and b ecom e literary agents of change. It is this process of
change from p a ssiv e o b se rv e rs to resisters that forms the basis of
JanMohamed's aesthetics.
Perhaps the m o st im p o rta n t and leading contem porary African-
American theorist is H en ry Louis Gates, Jr. Unlike many African-American
writers and critics, G ates d irects m uch of his attention to other African-
American critics, d eclarin g th at they and he "m ust redefine theory itself
from within [their] ow n black cultures, refusing to grant the premise that
theory is something that w hite people do. We are all heirs to a-itical theory,
hut we Black critics are h eir to the black vernacular as well." In his critica
theory, Gates provides a theoretical fram ework for developing a pocu
African-American literary canon. In this framework, he insists a ,
A frican literature be view ed as a form of language, not a representation^
ooal practices or culture. F o r black literary criticism to eve Pf ^ caIjg
tra a iu u n A -------
"tS bnS ^ deriVed fr m *he b' aCk itraditi

fy in g d n
i f fifSe
e r e n candi
e w h?ic^h Um
makkes the
th e Black
guage of blackness, the signi
,t U .Afrln-Arm'ric.mCriliciS-n
218 Guptt
, hig texts The S ig n ify in g M o n k e y (1988) and Fio
ition our very own. U
tradition Self(\9S7), G ates d evelops thes ? Ures
in lUack: Wools. S ig n s ,m l the J J A frican-A m erican li
- .......
S , as Hons,on Baher, Deborah M

Hazel Carby, bell hooks, Gloria A. Hull, Tom Morrison, Claudia Tate, 3
Angelou, Rita Dove, Ntozake Shange, and a host of African-American
nist, Marxist, psychoanalytic, and gay and lesbian critics, present
African-American theorists and critics are developing a body of Cllu
specific theory and criticism of African-American literature. Theirs th
lieve, is a significant discourse that has, for too long, been neele f ê'
study of this body of literature, they insist, needs to be reformed Th u
ning of this reformation, reclamation, and ongoing developme t &egirt-
liarly African-American literary theories and criticism h as h ? Pecu-
marginalized groups such as gays and le s b ia n s to develop other
their own critical theories and practical c ritic is m P nd articulaf
QUESTIONS f o r a n a l y s i s
^ Uollowlng
o t n fquestions:
the lens of African-American the o r y
n ca n th and criti-
* Is race evident?
Are the marc- , th eSernony?
:
Are any character margina|jzed ^ " ^ S e and cu ttu ra , practices?
ugh silence?
decent * E s
,Ve ln the S o u * fP,r,1S,n8 a h u t 13.5

' follow ed by the Northea
Chapter 11 * African-American Crliicim 219
aI1d the toother minorities, as aRmup A frici ^ M \ ln comP,ri*

< o ^ " v' educf " n" " y- andf <>cii,"y
o f ho m ed ian in com e o f European-Am ericans, African-A m e r ic a !
SS ^ r i m i n a m i n m h o u s in g em p lo y m en t, and accessible health e r e
statistics len d su p p o rt to th e cen tral concerns o f African-American lit-
^ r e : oppression su p p ressio n , an d enslavem ent o f blacks as depicted in
? * literature. And su ch are th e m ajor issues o f African-American literary
b ! l r v and c riticism : m a rg in a liz a tio n o f blacks; econom ic, social, political,
literary o p p ressio n ; th e h isto rical significance o f slavery and its present-
racial ram ificatio n s; an d th e celebration o f all things black in the arts.
^ According to H en ry L o u is G ates, Jr., the task o f African-American the-
nd criticism is n o t to c ry s p e c ia l" that is, demanding a unique ap-
otY a ^ unlike a n y o th e r p a s t o r contem p orary school o f criticism. Instead,
ProaC argUes th at b la c k th eo rists a n d critics m ust use the m ost sophisticated
^ ateS n orary th e o rie s a n d p ra ctice s to redefine the language o f critical the-
con e P aiiow b la c k la n g u a g e to en ter academ ic discourse and help dis-
ory a pjud ice a n d e th n ic d iffe re n ce s in literature. Toni M orrison, Farah
close p r C la u d ia T ate, an d D eborah G. C hay use the theories and
Jasmine s ^ c u ltu ra i stu d ies, fem inism , psychoanalysis, and gay and
f ctudies n o t o n ly to h ig h lig h t the concerns o f African-Americans in
lesbum ture but aiso to d evelop new critical theories that will reveal
the'as y et u n sp o k e n a n d s ile n c e d co n cern s o f the p ast and the present in
bl" X of African-American theory and criticism, both black and

wW^ r ; e s o n s fha, ^
^ .^ ^ A for
criticism f r i cAfrican
a n - A mAm
e rer
i c a n s : only
y blacks? Whites? Other minorities?
g f American Is
literature or
African-American literature an 8 Af ican.American literature a
unique unto itself? Is p m s ^ ' concern for minorities that will even-
reflection of America s conte P ^ reshaping the fabric of American liter-
tually wane, or is it an interest themselves depicting blacks
ature? And are African-Am erican w r multifaceted answers
unduly negatively? Such complex ques. n.American criticism for the next
will continue to shape contem porary African Arne
several decades.
12
theory: g a y and I_ESBIAn

QUEER
C R IT IC IS M
of awakening consciousness; il can also be

IPs exhilarating to be alm' . n , a me of a
confusing, disorienting, and painful.
. ,,when We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-vision" CoUt%!
Adrienne Rich, Wn English, October 1972
B
rokeback Mountain, the most discussed, controversial, and honored
Hollywood film of 2005, is based on a short story by E. Annie Proulx.
Proulx writes that one day she saw an old cowboy in a bar with a certain
look in his eye, a look of dissatisfaction with his life, as he observed the
younger cowboys. Deciding that the older cowboy was gay, Proulx began to
write her short story, one that would simmer in her mind for a protracted
time. Years after the story was published, Larry McMurty and Diana Ossana
would write the screenplay for what would become Hollywood's love story
for 2005.
Brokeback Mountain tells the story of two, nineteen-year-old, Wyoming
cowboys, Ennis Del Mar and Jack Twist. In the summer of 1963, the cowboys
are employed by a sheep farmer to guard his flock while the sheep graze on
Brokeback Mountain. After a few days of work and drinking, one night
without warning and seemingly any premeditation, the two cowboys have a
sexual encounter. After the night's event, Ennis says to Jack, "You know I
ain t queer, and Jack responds, "Me neither." Then Ennis remarks, "This is a
one-shot thing we got going on here." But it wasn't.
vvnen tne summer ends, hnms and Jack part ways, assuming they w
work at the same job next summer. When Jack returns the following year ai
applies for work, his boss tells him that he and his kind are not wanted the
Years pass, during which time Ennis and Jack fall in love with two bea
tiful women and marry. One day Jack surprises Ennis with a visit. Up1
meeting, both cowboys embrace and passionately kiss, shocking both
a i
t m/ a^ cene ls viewed through an upstairs window by Ennis s wi
Alma. Periodically Ennis and Jack decide to go on "fishing" trip*
220
Chapter 12 Queer Theory: Cay and U ih,
Criticism 221
, hack Mountain. As Alma soon discovers nn n.-u

BroKebac _outings ' no f,sh ar ever caught on
these many
iiw-mv en stru g g le w ith th eir fe..i{
B oth
taught him to h a te h o m o sex u als, tellj* f,,r each ,her P
lived to g eth er a n d w h o w ere b oth kt,, " nis he story L nnis's 'her had
Ennis's dad am o n g them . Ja c k , o n the m h b y ,h e tow n ! " ' d mt'" who
ings by trav elin g to M e x ico to seek a m l hand. finds anP 'plt- probably
m 0vie, E n n is h a s d iv o rced h is w ife ^ Prostitute. Toward m his fw l
is now livin g in a ru n d o w n trailer and cn J ?Ck'8 m a'ageTs ^ end of the
for Jack, say in g , " W h y d o n 'ty o u let m ^ n u e so stn fce r.uble' Ennis
like this-nothing and nobody - The ' * * * It s beu se S h, feelin8s
heed, and heartbroken Ennis stru T l * 68 e"d ing por you' ^ k , that I'm
been m urdered b y m e n w h o desr,-8 8 ! ' " 8 'Vltb his passirm i '' V onely-cn -
The critical rev iew s o f Z l X T k M * * " * " b <>has
a as personal
responses to th e m o v ie: M ountain are as varied
heartbreaking movie.
Le' ts an emotional,
Willie Waffle, Wafflemovies.com
m s ostensible gay Western is marked by a heightened degree o f sensitivity and

tact, as well as an outstanding performance."
Todd McCarthy, Variety.com
"Some American audiences may reject out o f hand a gay-themed tale set in the
macho sanctity o f the West. But they'd be missing great performances."
James Vemiere, Boston Herald
"While the message at the core is that love is love, the way the initial sexual encounter
is shown w ill only reinforce the negative views that bigots have of gay culture."
John Venable, Supercala.com
"And Lee (the director) conveys maddening delirium rendered in the way one man s
eyesgaze at another's, and then look away, and the lookmg-away amounts tothemur-
der of two souls as surely as i f they'd drawn guns and hit eac ot in ear .
Ken Tucker, New York Magazine
"Any o f us can imagine a forbidden passion tfZ T r affectbn

flood tide, never allow ing us to question it. Wh /
would carry a purse, a lariat or both is beside the poin .
r cwrence Toppman, Charlotte Observer
. ,-sbianCriUcism
Ibrory. Gay ,ul L
nl Clt"'r ,J * . , , u,.fulfilled love. It's on absolute tri-
. i iht* attiiute" 14
-un,f)h,
A in exviy V- ' . Portland
Daw n Taylor, p n uT 'u.
Tribune
. ^ ^ iv e r f^ c a n s id e r a tu m .a d e ^
"This story ofsupped P^H t$'
moving, indeed laceratingp frank Swietek, One Guy's Opinion
something that is much more p u re -a rough

"Lee strips away all the pizzazz fo r
and tough emotional journey."
Mark Sells, Oregon Herald
"Eloquently sums up and universalizes the hopelessness o f Jack and Ennis' situa
tion while showing the staggering cost of hypocrisy and deceit.
James Sanford, Kalamazoo Gazette
"It is up to date in its version offorbidden love because its conflict is based on one
of the last socially-sanctioned forms of discrimination."
Robert Roten, Laramie Movie Scope
"One of the all-time greatest love stories, its potent poignancy comes from univer
sally relatable ideas like nagging love, lost dreams, a half-lived life and comfort in
knowing incomplete joy is better than none at all."
Nick Rogers, State Journal-Register (Springfield, Illinois)
"Michelle Williams nearly steals the film as Ennis's wife in a quiet, complex,
heartbreaking performance."
Jon Popick, Planet Sickboy
"Explores repressed feelings, loneliness, suffering, and alienation as adroitly as

any film in recent memory."
John A. Nesbit, Toxicuniverse.com
Mountain' Hspunch^thp^ ^ cowboy' movie. What gives 'Brokeback

is told." n tnênded) straight way in which its romance
"I MP7W u Eric Melin, Scenestealers.com

/ never became emotionally involved in their story."
Sean McBride, Sean the Movie Guy

a ^ T 12 . Q lw
y C a y aiuj .
Change the namesand g m d m as " Cr"'<im 2M
^ n-laU- ,o i f l , y ,m v any sor, U l u l l
grets. that
Daniel M. Kitnmel, W orcester Telegram b G azette

r. it/s u n e q u iv o c a lly that it's in ev ery on e's best in terest fo r g a y couples
Ken Fox, T V Guides Movie Guide

Foremost about a love that can never break
out o f its societal prison."
Jeffrey C hen, W indow to the M ovies
The hubbub seems more p o litica lly driven in the wake o f the gay marriage debate
And an Oscar w in w ill be pandering to that."
Kevin Carr, 7 M Pictures

"Thefilm 's edge is its same-sex controversy."
K evin A. Ransom , M oviecrypt.com
What these review s of Brokeback M o u n ta in successfully capture is the central

concerns and questions of queer theoiy, one of the most recent schools of lit
erary criticism to ap p ear in academia. Influenced by deconstruction, femi
nism, gay and lesbian studies, psychoanalysis, postcolonialism, and other
postmodern theories, queer theory questions the very terms we use to de
scribe ourselves such as heterosexual or homosexual. These terms, queer theo
rists argue, are socially constructed concepts that do not define who we
really are. As dem onstrated in the movie reviews, queer theory challenges
the assumption that hum an nature is unchangeable and can be defined by a
finite list of characteristics. In queer theory's ongoing development, it asks
such questions as the following:
What is a man?
What is a woman?
What is g e n d e r ?
What does it mean to be a h e te ro se x u a l? Homosexual? Gay? Lesbian? Bisexual?
Queer?
What does it mean to be masculine? F em in in e?
What does it mean to be human?
What is normal? A b n o r m a l?
What is a " m a ch o " man?
^hat is love?
y^hat is forbidden" passion? F o rb id d e n b y w hom ?
, , psbian Criticism
224 Chapter 12 Queer Theory C<ay and l ^
cs?
What is "unfulfilled" love? What arc \^ ^ ^ caUed forbidden-love relationship?
Why do hypocrisy and decent opera sanction the various kinds of W
. Who
wnuui vvnv to
or what society
---------^ ,.. 7 uisexuaiuy
Heterosexuality? Homosexua y a "societal prison" out of some
. How and why do some elements of soctetyt
love relationships?
W hat does it mean to be homopho ic.
These questions and theh multiple answere ^ traditiona^ Wa

ory and its continuing developmen
viewing our sexuality and our identities.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AND ASSUMPTIONS

Throughout much of the twentieth century, the word queer w as a pejorative
term used to describe homosexuals, particularly males. U sm g a Marxist tech
nique called hailing the subject or interpellation, queer theorists embraced
the word and turned it on its head, making it a respectable critical term in ac
ademic studies. The term was first coined by the gender theorist Teresa de
Lauretis in a special edition of the feminist journal differences titled Queer
Theory: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities, published in 1991. Since its inception,
queer theory endeavors to debunk the idea that a person's identity is stable or
fixed at birth. Like all schools of criticism, queer theory borrows, adopts, and
adapts concepts, terms, theories, and methodologies from previously devel
oped critical schools and finds its multipronged, historical roots in feminism,
deconstruction theory, gender studies, and gay and lesbian studies.
Beginning with Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication o f the Rights of Woman
(1792), feminist theory and criticism demands that w om en define for them
selves what it means to be a woman. Following W ollstonecraft Virginia
Woolf asserts in A Room 0/ One's Own (1929) that women must reject the social
construct of femaleness and establish and define their own identity. A decade
later, Simone de Beauvoir declares in The Second Sex (1949) that women must
reject that they are the Other, an object defined and interpreted by males. Two
decades later, Kate Millett writes in Sexual Politics (1969) that a female is bom,
hm Created' r e S SGX' MiUet asserts' is biologically determined,
but one gender is a social construct created by society. Many feminist critics
. 1 o r r perpetuated
constructed and * 8^ bv * institu
social
B e tu s e t n d o ^ , T " ender' - mutable and attributive-

should not and must ^ ocia* ic*eas>feminists declare that gender
u d not and must not shape the identity of what it means to be a woman-
Chapter 12 Queer Theory- Gav
y ' '-ay and Lesbi
By a s se rtin gth a t g e n d e r m u st n o t sh Crilicism 225
theorists a tta ck th e lo n g -h e ld cla ssica l h a W(^ a n ' s m ..
r i c h a sse rts th a t th e tru e e s se n c e o r i d e n f i r e S ca]l j d
0f finite a n d fix e d p r o p e r tie s th a t a re th e - f a " "dividual ! all8m'
means to b e h u m a n . E ss e n tia lism d eclares fhSent,al components ^ mposed
have an u n c h a n g e a b le h u m a n n atu re a t n j ^ t0 be human m e a n U
believe th at o u r s e x u a lity a n d o u r g ^ d e r % ? * . * * *
features o u r tru e s e lv e s th a t g iv e us o u r core se n , T ' ned by u r esaenfiS
tity, an d o u r s e lfh o o d . N o t h i n g - n o t s o c i e t y e ? f,wh " e are, our idem
beliefs can c h a n g e th is u n c h a n g e a b le core, our eSse ' r any sPiri,ual
Contem porary feminist critics reject essential
an unchangeable h u m an essence and accept '' ' sw m p lion of
constructivism. These social constructivists reject c ! as social
unalterable hum an essence but assert that send er . " tahs s belief in an
term and concept. W ords such as homosexual, cons,lr" cted
are likewise constructed and shaped distinctions that are suMert,*1/CT k
change. All such term s are laden with
deconstructed and eventually reconstructed. Unlike the essentialist who
believes that know ledge is discovered, forgotten, and repressed and must
then be rediscovered through history and experimentation, the social con
structivist agrees w ith the poststructuralist assumptions of Jacques
Derrida's deconstruction.
For Derrida and m any other postmodern critics, Western metaphysics
assumes logocentrism , a belief in an ultimate reality or center of truth that
serves as the basis for all thoughts and actions. Various centers of truth can
exist: the self, a spiritual being, reason, and so forth. According to Derrida,
logocentric thinking has its origin in Aristotle's principle of noncontradic
tion: A thing cannot both have a property and not have a property. Hence,
Western m etaphysics has developed an "either-or" mentality that leads to
dualistic thinking and to the constant centering and decentering of absolute
truth(s). Once a center is established, it can be quickly decentered. Su^
soning leads D errida to conclude that Western metaphys.es based on a
system of binary operation s or conceptual oppositions, goo '
esty/falsehood.ûp/dow n, rig h t/w ro n g , G odyhum aniând so forth^ In
each of these binary operations, one cone p ( unprivileged,

privileged, and the second (the d e n o m in a to r s ^ ^ opposition relate
Both the privileged and the unpnvilege p transcendental signified. What
directly to a concept of truth Derrida calls concept of truth.
we privilege in binary oppositions thus suPp<^ jda that we think logocen*
Social constructivist feminists agree wi , . but relative? If noab-
Wcally. What happens, however, if truth is not a > ,g nQ transCendenta
^lute truth exists, truth is socially construe e then seifhood is no
Slgnified that gives meaning to the concep 0 f dve part our Um
an ^solute, not a quality that is an "essential, objec
mid Lesbian Criticism
22b ChrtpU'.t U - Q ,tThl'ory:Cy

( >SHonta\ism is thus turned on
nrgvu^ ot or predetermined, but is
naUm. ** MWrt"; S v , is not r * * * L.xiHl8 that determines who or
! answ er i ocesS o f c h a n g e . /\ny u m ary opp

not objective, and am constantly >n W e v # s o cia l c o n s tr u c t th a t m u st un-
tion w e create to define ourselves is s t^ m a , e / fe m a lc , m a n / w o m a n , and
dergo constant revision. In P a r ,' \ ' ' u n stab le c o n c e p ts an d a re p ro d u cts of
masculine/feminine binaries "tP "-* exists no stable concept of the self or
culture and institutions of pow er. g an d u n s ta b le . S im ila rly , concepts
selfhood because these term s a r e s ) u n s ta b le . T h e s e concepts
such as sexuality, m aleness, ^ f^ " % n m e d s - t h a , is , c o n c e p ts w h ^
meanings are s h i f t i n l The meaning of these signifieds re-
SiêThmughout^tV^pastU&everalCdecades^feminist and gender critics high-

lightthe unstable relationship expressed in the m a n /w o m a n , m ale/fem ale,
and masculine /feminine binary oppositions. Because these critics believe
that no transcendental signified exists to stabilize language w ith its accom
panying binary oppositions, the term gender becomes for them a free-floating
signified that shifts on a daily basis. For exam ple, the m ale head of the
home in 1960 in all probability did not wash dishes, m ake the bed, or clean
the house. Nor did he pierce his ears or other body parts. On the other hand,
today's male often performs household tasks and m ay w ear an earring in
one if not both ears.
In the mid-1980s, another school of criticism borrow s and develops the
gender concerns of the feminists and gender critics: gay and lesb ian studies.
Whereas feminist and gender critics debate and redefine the m an/w om an
binary and emphasize gender differences, gay and lesbian studies target the
heterosexual/homosexual binary, emphasizing sexual differences while also
examining sexual differences applicable to the male and female, respectively.
Gay and lesbian studies also analyze the social structures that have defined
gays and lesbians as deviant or abnormal, questioning how such definitions
developed throughout history, and why heterosexuality has been so posi-
ively defined. Like feminist studies, gay and lesbian studies are also studies
throêhnm th66 * rf;discover those gay and lesbian w riters who
from
trom tthe
h Jliterary
t t V rcanonuS b also
but ,Ve ^Cen
from Silenced'
history m asked' or erased not only
opedYrom eav ' 1 ' ' ' 8rOUP f lilerary theorists and critics devel-
rd di^fey 4 bas^;v^ranTrrr ory-unukeg ayan die sbia
n
mizes the discussion of gender w h i l e m ^ ' ,Sender' queer theory mini-
versation concerning sexual different u t f 21" 8 and enlar8 inS the .C
of homosexuality, queer stud
y 4
es is
stuaics is more inclusive
^ abandonin8 an]a.lesbian
than gay and naK
neory:Ga
studies, an aly zin g , d iscu ssin g , an d dt-bat! Y ^ Usbian Crii
aueer that is, o d d , a b n o rm a l, o r pe c u |-hn8 sxual t(m.
C,l'Wm 22?
' 7
Hvists, q u e e r th e o rists d e c la re th nt Like ,he fP'cs 'hat am c
fixed: they are u n sta b le . N o set o f p rZ dl'n,ities and " st ""dal c t? d
nature or o u r sex u ality . F ro m q u eer u X ? h e* is* C d T ' " " ' *
di5CUSS w h at it m e a n s to b e m a le o r fc m 2 u poi"< of v Jw j '" e humll,
all differen ' âc e m 8 so cia lly constructed o Cause u r sexual* Pîntlt*ss to
com p artm entalization o f a n y perSon into a 1 ^ ,hety a l ' * ? " *
some shared life sty le o r h a b it v ersu s thns <? lall>r S ig n e d hallcnS the
can be d efin ed a s a b n o rm a l, lack in g , c o m * / 0 do not- No idenhw based on
7
including o u r sex u ality , a re s h a p e d a n d d ev il' f " " "'Plete. O u i Z 8.r Up
vidual actio n s p o w e r stru ctu re s w ith in s o c i e t PrndbyhS Cial
that are in c o n tin u o u s flu x . ^ and a host of complex forreL
QUEER c r i t i c a l t h e o r is t s
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick (1950-2009) was one of queer theory's leading theo-
nsts. Earning her undergraduate degree at Cornell Universiq, andtfph D
from Yale University, Sedgwick taught at several prestigious liberal arts un
dergraduate colleges, also serving as professor of English at Duke University
and, until her death in 2009, at The City University of New York Graduate
Center. Her groundbreaking texts include Between Men: English Literature and
Male Hom osocial D esire (1985), Epistemology o f the Closet (1990), Tendencies
(1993), A D ia lo g u e o f Love (2000), and Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy,
P erform ativity (2003). In E pistem ology Sedgwick affirms the necessity of
studying gay/lesbian and queer theories, asserting:
An understanding o f virtually any aspect of modern Western culture must.be,

not merely incom plete, bu t damaged in its central substance to the degn* t a t
it does not incorporate a critical analysis of modern homo xaa j
Hon, especially from the relatively de-centered perspective of modem gay
anti-homophobic theory.
f nnd* "People are different
Sedgwick's w orking thesis is simple yet pro o ^ ^ but accepted.
from each other." These differences should no r lesbian/ gay,
fn Tendencies she "a tte m p ts to find new wa^ . compiex social ecology
and other sexually dissident loves and i en ii icjentities and identifica-
* here the presence of different gender, di wQrd^ whendjrece
tions, will be taken as a given." For Sedgwi / ^ acts__that is, on y P
toward or about a person, hinges upon Per about them selves are>q ^
p e who use the word q u e e r in the first per ^ Author {f en g n the
Another leading queer theorist is Ju 1 Jodies that Ma
ern'nism a n d th e S u b v e r s io n o f Id e n ti y (
and Lesbian Criticism
228 Chapter 12 Queer Theory: Gay
m u m ire L im its o f " S ex " (1993), E x c ita b le S p e e c h : A P o lit ic s o f t h e p

Di:>97), G iv in g a n A cco u n t o f O n e s e lf (2005), and many others, Bpo
(199
V " off comparative
lessor - .......literature
% and rhetoric
literature at the University
anu nu-iw.------- - y *sot^
^ .n. ( r ^ T^ aCalifo^Pro.
^
Berkeley. One of her most influential works, Gender Trouble, assert**1*0**1^ ^
ade a m istake when it declared that w om en w ere a sp ,S .^ a t f e 7
n.. feminists, maintains B u tl; C,a^gr0,
* trson a1 , . nne does at a Particu*ar ^me,

- 6cnder,
.......chants
and . - ..... Vwm
i Jp*-'rs(,n
{ormaUve WPL th at gender
is- wha*
and identity, not
We ado
universal
and arG/con-
to our suppse0 ------ p" r ,

cause, of our performances. For Butler, the perform ative nature of o u 7 i !w
I is
titles _ quee ll__^.> 1/A*I-* v
- ^ sC ^ ' skey
Other queer theorists such as Jonathan G oldberg, M ichael W
Sandy Stone, and Joseph Litvak use postist theories to investigate s afner'
verse topics as cross-dressing, bisexuality, public sex, gay marriate> j ^
j -- . - e tt i*i._ _i____ i__ i_ _ c _? _ a8/ and
media, to name a few. Unlike other schools of criticism, queer studies desire^
to be open ended, refusing at times to define itself by using any binary ^
positions. If such binaries were established, queer theorists believe a
theory would become too exclusionary and hinder its developm ent
queer theorists, queer theory does not enable them to define their identr
but is a critique of it. Accordingly, for queer theorists their theory and critT '1 ^
are "always under construction" and always perform ative. QSm
Read carefully Nathaniel H aw thorne's sh ort story "Y oun g Goo

Brown." Then ask yourself the following questions:
How are the binaries male /female and masculine/ fem inine being definec
Who attributes masculine or feminine qualities to w hom ?
How is gender being ascribed?
Arewhat
By the critical assumptions of essentialism or social constructivism establ
character(s)?
How are the characters' sexual identities shaped and formed?

Is gender performative?
What prejudices exist about any character's supposed sexuality?

What social forces or constructs determine sexual identity?
What is queer about the text?
Is any character in crisis concerning his or her sexual identity?

Chapter 12 . QUeer
Th
eory: Ga
CRITIQUES A N D R E S P O N S E y a n d Usbi
,an Crit
,csm 229
rnxeet theory assumes that our person . .
stant flux. An antiessentialist theorv " lde"ties ar
Lential core to our humanness that H V ^ studies d 6 Unstab*e and in
^ p eo p le Afferent. We m ^ f ^ ' . %
but we ourselves m ust declare by our " W SOci y to Sh?nJutl maintain
ruiued soc.etal bm ary oppositions W e ^ idcn'itie8;
should determine our identities. We m l , 7 r ac P a n predct -
identity, gender, and sexual differences W>,Cha" en8e the co n l8. preiudic
male is alw ays in flux, alw ays a p r o c e ^ ! means to be a L ,f sexuaI
becoming, queer theorists challenge the f becoing Seein nra fe_
Like other schools of criticism, queer theo h ^ S

it is deviant or weird and should not be studied n ? * * 8- Some bebeve
its content but som ew hat fearful to read its theori i u * 8 are i8norantf
social constructivist position and believe that a , y disagree with its
not fluid or unstable. Still others decree that auer ft.0" S S6XUal identity is
and unlike real life. And many claim .ha, g a y T n lL stta7 smH0
theory (these two schools of criticism are often viewed as one) e m p T
and lesbian politics, m aking them more important than they actually are
while celebrating sexual desires. 3
Queer theorists them selves affirm that they do not know where their
theories m ay take them, for as Butler notes, there are many queer theories,
not just one. Q ueer theory is, from her perspective, unlimited in its possibili
ties because it refuses to define itself, seeing itself, like the concept of self-
identity, as alw ays in flux. In refusing to define itself, queer theory, argue
some critics, m ay be the cause of its own eventual demise. Being future di
rected and open ended, this critical stance is chiefly characterized by its tran
sitory and transform ational potential. Because it holds nonreferentiality as a
core tenet, it may, say som e critics, envision a future that is indee ummag
inable and m ay have already outlived its ' queer moment in ish7-
On the other hand, som e critics, such as L y ^ e Huffer m her work
Foucault: R ethinking the Foundations o f Q u e e r J e ^ J aU,s of Sexuality,
queer theory into the future. Revisiting Mich we are consistently
Huffer views sexu ality as a lived experience, one thoughtful research
called on to remember. Such innovative, provoca 1 , jo j|vecj future.
may indeed propel queer theory into a success tê text for a poignant
See R e a d in g s o n Literary Criticism at t e queer and c\ueer theory,
^say that helps clarify the m eaning of the
Queer Theory," by A nnam arie Jagose.
C RITIC ISM
we know that things that are divided are yet

If we represent knowledge as a tree, the
we divisions and ignore the connections is to
connected. We know that to observe the
destroy the tree.
Wendell Berry
clarion call to arms is being rung throughout college and university

A campuses across America and Europe. Its loud message is clear and
pointed: Go greenotherwise known as the greening of campuses. A
seedbed for relevant and current issues that affect all of us, colleges and uni
versities are rising to the environmental task of making their campuses
green. For example, the October 2006 meeting of the Association for the
Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education at Arizona State
University introduced the Climate Commitment document. More than five
hundred college and university presidents signed it, committing their insti
tutions to achieve climate neutrality, to reduce greenhouse gases, to purchase
or produce at least 15 percent of their institution's electricity consumption
from renewable sources, and to reduce campus waste. Innovative but some
times controversial campus projects stemming from such commitments
include eliminating napkins at tables while providing napkin dispensers
around the perimeters of dining halls (thus eliminating tons of paper waste),
banning trays in dining halls (and saving tons of uneaten food formerly car
ried on the spaces around plates, which were all placed on trays), and setting
time limits on showers in dorms. Other less controversial but highly inno
vative greening initiatives continue to occur on m any campuses. For
instance, at Seattle University, former trash such as o W a !*. hpads. water-
230
'MN'r 1 3
What ....... .. an a stu d en t n ' ^ 8' n,ui nm3

S environm entalists of the 1960s a n d f ^ " "
,.fe 15 interconnected. H ow we live, how and w . d lared decade* a * a,
^vvork, how w e p la ^ a n d even how we study a r e a n l ? '' h,>,v and where
h ids Walt Disney W orld in Orlando, Florida r nterreIa*ed activities
R e d n e s s w hen S p acesh ip Earth was b u ih aM h 8P" 2ed h'h^terco '
SrtTOT- We are 3,1 travelers on the same planet inhlh , piece of *
E , sing the earth 's soil and air, living, in essence in " s,milar sPa i ,
^ nitV ^ espoused by the leading U tin American ra*her lar8a com-
^vironment, W alter Rojas Perez, Earth, our home
garth," a place w here none are conquerors but all are crewmember *
As fellow cre w m e m b e rs, each of us, say those who have signed the
College Com m itm ent docum ent, is responsible for our planet. As such it is
up to us both individually and collectively, they argu<s-to protect planet
Earth, our natural w orld. In essence, we must become peoples of "place,"
those who recognize that w e define ourselves biologically, socially, and po
litically through everyd ay, com m on events: eating, working, and playing.
Addressing our p resen t-d ay global environmental crisis, say these environ
mentalists, is an interdisciplinary task that must be undertaken at all levels:
internationally, nationally, and locally. In the academic arena, spearheading
such concerns is one g ro u p of scholars-critics-writers: the ecocritics.
Fcocritics' environm ental w ritings and criticism have been dubbed with a
variety of n am es: g reen stu d ies, green cultural studies, green criticism
ecopoetics, literary ecology, environm ental literary criticism, and per ap
the most popular n am e, ecocriticism .
WHAT IS ECOCRITICISM?
riticism is the latest enier^ ^ n t i r o n n w ^

Dating from the late 1980s, eco c as human beings ism and femi-
shidies that d ir e c tly r e la te s w h o w e a d e r-oriented * theoruts who
Like other schools o f c r it ic is m suchi r sn d U ^ .
nism, ecocriticism is an eclectic grou p worId, a t t e s t i n g ^ ,he mst
emphasize place, n atu re, an d theJ rh/ u lw re) andJ ^ W * * * " / &
nectedness betw een h u m an s ( . . m appears 1 riotfdty an<* *.n
-ccinc, and best definition o f ecoc PyP Chery l
f ulm arks in L ite ra ry Ecology (1995)/ e dy 0f the jcism exam
mm: Simply put, ecocriticism s j f * aS fern ***
Mature and the physical environm
232 Chapter 13 E , nnscious perspective, and Marxist
, ... ,ure from a Benê production and economic class t0
language and ness of m,odeS J rth-centered approach to literary
criticism brings an .,icism takes an ecocriticism has now become a
its reading of text , to Clotfe y, canonical status datlnl
studies." " f study ^ ' iterary " f d e S ' t b a t she did not coin the t e ^
legitimate fieW of s ^ acknow ledge^ artic, e "Literature and
from 19 J William H. Ruec the word first appeared
Ecology: An Experiment in E c" ^ ilics challenge he academic commm
Glotfeby and other "nature writing." Such a challenge is not
nity to re-examme what th y ^ Gf Thoreau or Emerson and passively
simply a summons to rerea According to another leading ecocritic
and enioyably contemplate nature. T)|1. Em)iromtiertfal Imagination:
and author of the groundbrea formao f A m e ric a
Thoreau, Nature Writing, ana activism, declaring that ecocriticism
Lawrence Buell, ecocriticism ca literature and the environment con-
is a "study of the relationship ^tween praxis." ln other
ducted in a spirit of co m jtm e n tt ^ ^ participate in actually doing
seething about our environment, not simply contemplating change or in-
X e m e n t. Such a call to action, ecocritics maintain, must necessarily raise
moral questions about how we interact with nature. Through examining
texts that highlight the natural environment, ecocritics entreat us to partici
pate in practices that will change our environment and our material world,
encouraging us to become guardians of our planet not only for ourselves but
also for future generations.
H ISTO RICAL D EV ELO PM EN T
When many people hear the word ecocriticism, thoughts of Ralph Waldo
Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, William Wordsworth, and others who write
about nature and who create pastoral scenes for their readers come to mind.
Long before these writers, however, the Greeks and Romans along with many
others authored texts that contained pastoral scenes that highlight setting and
the natural world while generating literary responses to environmental con
cerns, such as animal rights, pollution, and excessive waste. One can legiti
mately argue, then, that nature literature" is as old as Western literature itself.
., Qsjr T T ' e^v^ronmenta^sm and ecocriticism have historic roots in
M W C ' f eminism its historically based first, second, and
t d waves of criticism, ecocriticism can be divided into first- and second-
wave environmental criticism. The first ecocritic to note such a distinction U
Crisis a n d m a ^ a Z l Z s i T T ^ T '
.... i A . SSSKS ZSEK SEK fc
Ch;
twentieth cen tu ry that reread and exam * Ec<*riticism
teenth century. S eco n d -w ave criticism ned "natUm 233
current w orks su ch a s Rachel Carso^ T , 'he othcr h 7 a "8" the ni
,ore directly on cu rre n t environm ent f " " ' Sl ' r " r ( S examin " e'
example, that tou ch ed off environm ental C ncerns I i! Which
debated today, su ch as p oison s from ? Concen>s that * Son's * t fa
products that ultim ately lead to d a n g e m ^ ' K
supply- A rg u in g th a t su ch p o .so n s are l emicals appea ' and ter
Carson dem onstrates that insecticides can T * danSous h a ' " ! ' food
to death, causing a h ost of diseases alrm ay ln a Person's hnT fadiation,
Dating from the m id-1980s to lh e S b? h ^
its ^ us n n in eteen th -cen tu ry literature dh,'i5 rS'Wave êcocriticisn, with
grounds: A m erican and British. During the neri a f 6S ltself on geogra^h^
American L iteratu re" (mid-nineteenfh clnt
Margaret Fuller (1 8 1 0 -1 8 5 0 ), editor of T e ^ l au,hore such
American transcendentalists, The D ia l; Ralph outhPie for the
Nature (1836), a landmark essay defining the nhiln Emerson' athor of
American R om antic m ovem ent; and Henry David 7^phlCal content of the
become fhf>
has Uo^nmc* nninfpQ<;pnfial nature writing text*
the quintessential author of what
(1854), set the standard for nature writing. These work<fhIV ? * the Woods
togs nahire and a type of spirituality that connects b o th ltu m a li^ d * *
ture itself a life force in and through nature that humanity can rndThculd
embrace. Known as transcendentalism, this peculiarly American philosophy
became the philosophical center of American literature during the first half of
the nineteenth century. And it is these works that the first-wave ecocritics used
to highlight their chief concerns: place, setting, nature, the earth, and the spirit
forces embodied in nature itself.
Simultaneously in G reat Britain the first-wave scholars of "green stud
ies" (the nam e given to ecocriticism in Great Britain) centered their scholar
ship on authors such as William Wordsworth (17701850), coauthor of Lyrical
Ballads (1798) along with Samuel T. Coleridge (1772-1834); and the poetry of
John Keats (1 7 9 5 -1 8 2 1 ), a u th o r of m any famous Romantic poems such as
"La Belle Dame Sans M erci" and "O de to a Nightingale." In 1973, Welsh_aca-
demicand leading foundational critic articulates
published his book The C o u n try and the City. ' f ituer term -
some of the chief ecocritical or green st^dl^SclC^ eJ^he key distinctions be-
ecocriticism or green studies w as coined, 1 &
bveen rural and urban and nature and civilization. ^ places less empha-
Dating from the late 1990s, second-wave eco ^ authors, while em-
Sls on the pastoral and R om antic American an exampie, second-wave
Phasizing present-day environm ental concern gtjce movement. In is
eccritics have been activ e in the environme (2006), the Welsh a^ t o J
^ s a "Environm entalism and Ecocriticism t
y t i t l e d movement is a
>Hc Richard Kerridge notes that the e n v i r o n - * ^ defend th em selves
cUective term for the efforts of p oor com
1M
c w " * * ,ic,R'''" Ctem propoent of this movement says
toxic < 1 3 ^ class, race, and colonial.
V -r
d untamed nature tnau ----- w
ecocritics do not abandon the interests of first-w ave e
second-wave n difficult to declare a particular ecocritic to be sololvy a Cr*^
first.
cism, it is often difficult
wave or a second-wave critic. . ... ~
As one of the latest critical movements to join lib rary Clsm and prac.
tice, ecocriticism and its emergence on the Jll" rQ aJ k SlU^ ^ f Rgef Can dated
from the mid-1980s in America and the early 1990s in Great Britain. A pivotal
year for ecocriticism is 1992, the year the Association of Literature and the
*1 :i" araHomir* ___
E n vironm ent (ASLE) was to rm e a , aiwi'b y ........ . c , r c. */
Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and E n v iro n m en t, or ISLE, first published in
1993. Since 1993, a variety of other worldwide organizations such as ASLE-UK
(Association for the Study of Literature and the Environm ent), ASLE-Korea,
vnssuuamm iui vuc - . H Qf Canada /(ESAC or ACEE)
F Q A r r%r A P P P \ have
and the Environmental Studies ss advocating the concerns of ecocriti-
become active literary / ^ ^ ^ ^ g c o c r i t i c s whose works have already been
cism. Without question, the 1 g cintfeltv Harold From m , and Law rence
mentioned in this chapter ^ ^ ^ ^ Z n i e r e n c e s on ecocriticism,
Buell. Their work has sp ear ^ oncerns both within and outside the academy.
bringing attention to ecocn (American Indian Literature, Environmental
Other critics such as Joni Adamson {/xmericun muu*
JusHce and Ecocriticism, 2001), John Elder (American U ature Writers>mi two>voh
umes, 1996), Scott Bryson (Ecopoetry: C ritical Introd uctio n, 2002) i Glen A.
Love (Practical Ecocriticism: Literature, Biology, the Environm ent, 2003 ) have also
contributed significantly to ecocritical theory and practice. W hile American
scholars presently dominate ecocritical practices, year by year ecocritical ap
proaches to texts are gaining worldwide interest as evidenced in a variety of
conferences and other scholarly activities occurring in Europe and Asia.
A S S U M P T IO N S
Unlike some other schools of literary criticism, ecocriticism does not have a
unified set of assumptions to which most ecocritics ascribe. Being one of the
rhalU>ncrCri ^ S<i S/ ^cocfiticism continues to grow and change as it
arv a n X l f r ly^T rldT lde Concems for the environment through liter-
how ew r artirnl T / Wn Phil s P ^ c a l assumptions. We can,
however, articulate some of its chief concerns.
Ecocriticism
emphasizes the interconnectedness of all things, including nature and culture,
must be inconstant dtaiog'ue8 lh!" humanities and lhe sciences should ant
believes that hum an culture is connect P,W '
tty, tt m icrocosm , d irectly affec,s a n ? , '0 * physical EC0Cri,i* 235
niacmcosm. nd ls affecJ b> World; tha(
debunks poststructuralism's assump,i , 8P ^ cal
standing of nature, the world, and hum * ^ g u a , , . . ' th<
construct. Umanityis a 8 lncludirw
assumes that nature, the world, and hum - '^ ta r a l/i^ J ^
nature literally exists and camtot be c o n ^ ^ P 0^ o,, , 8
humanity's language, concepts, or beliefs'" r fl% d escriSP Status-' that is
is ethically com m itted to the natural wo U ^ *ncoded by
ta , rather than sim ply an object for be,ng vital, .
analyzes texts that concern themselves with d Ussion- 8 y lmP0r-
assumes that all texts necessarily deveTol thephysical environment
leads to an ecocritical reading of the text. 3 C nC6pt of "place" or setting th
is ecologically sensitive in textual analysis. 8
encourages, endorses, and is active in political h*
and textual analysis; that is, ecocriticism e n c o u r a S ^ ^ ? * 311(1 ^ g h texts
ports its causes. ges Political activism that sup-
advocates a literal " s a v in g " of planet Earth, not onlv for
also for generations to come. y present generations but
believes in being inclusive, not exclusive, in its theories and practices.
METHODOLOGY
Unlike some other schools of literary criticism, ecocriticism embraces plurality

and is somewhat free of theoretical disputes and infighting. Because ecocriti
cism welcomes m ultiple perspectives, there exists no single, dominant
methodology by which ecocritics analyze texts. Marked by what J. Levin calls
a "tremendously am bitious intellectual, ethical, political, and even (some
times) spiritual agend a" in his October 1999 article in PMLA titled Form on
Literatures of the Environm ent," ecocriticism approaches texts with an intense
environmental concept of place and a profound interest and un e^ten ^
nature. It seeks to dem onstrate humanity s connecte ness oma ^ tQ
some ecocritics dub the ecosphere that is, humanity sffle Like scientists,
all the earth's living organism s and their Phys^ f or place), noting how
ecocritics keenly observe a text's "environm den, 0nstrate how place af-
characters and place are intertwined and se & affect the natural setting or
fects and defines the characters as do the charac e ûmanity must safe-
Place. Ecocritics also hold to the moral PCocentric value. And it is
8uard its planet a con cep t that they u a read and analyzetexts _
trough the lens of this ethical perspective terests, an ecocritic may
Depending on one's particular PerS!J? rent perspectives. For ex
Prach textual analysis by emphasizing 1
23t. Chapter 13 he ave interest: the beauty of
i .uiu.ht eeocriticism or W ordsworth. Another
one eeocritie may hb h ^ pim.rson,Thc ' liticaUy inscribed. This
nature in the nature W ature writi g P . the how s and whvs
mny acknowledge, M ^ through the text. Still another
critic would then d e n u m ^ ^ ^ aS e v ^ ^ f ^ monstrating what ^
of protecting plaee or b "urban natur* ' those w orks of literature
peocritic may choose to tocus ^ se rio u sn e ss-m o ^ aiure
critic Cynthia Doitoring calls tox.c C " S" indus,rial ecosystem s^ And ye,
that highlight apocalyptic t h ^ e s m P ^ ^ ecocompos.t.on, showm g in
another ecocritic may choose h> e k can develop ecosens.t.ve human
the composition classroom how mdw m em oir w riting. In addition,
relationships by and through 1 ' ritic can also encourage environ,
the ecofriendly composition protesst bioRraphies through the lens of
mental "life writing," both examining , udents them selves to write
environmental concerns and encouraging
ecoaware autobiographies. ecocriticism's assumptions and be-
Such diverse practices have ena ag of stu dy. O ne such area is
liefs to crystallize into eyer-expan 1 g anaiyZes the interconnection of
ecofeminism (or ecological femims ), their literary methodology,
,he oppression of women and " ^ ^ ^ n sex.sm and the domination
\} \
ecofeminists demonstrate connections between ** eorietv is linked
i Ii of nature. The subjection and subordination of w o m e n in society ked,
j i they believe, to the prescribed degradation of nature in a patriarchal society
1 As men dominate women, they argue, men class,fy not only w om en but al
i
4 11 races and natural objects. Such thinking is demonstrated through a senes of
i ! binaries or opposites to which many people subscribe, either consciously or
1 i
subconsciously, including but not limited to man s dom inating woman
(man/women), white/black, and culture/nature. By examining such works
of fiction as Ursula K. Le Guin's Alw ays C om ing Home (1985) and Joan
Slonczewski's A Door into Ocean (2000), ecofeminists underscore these con
cerns, thereby bringing ecofeminist interests to the attention of their readers.
Such readings of texts have embraced what some scholars call the environ
I! mental justice movement. By consciously raising aw areness of class, race,
and gender through ecocritical readings of texts, ecocritics issue a "call to
arms," actively highlighting their concerns while bringing to the foreground
the many unjust scenarios of race, class, and gender as pictured not only in
texts but in society as a whole.
Q U EST IO N S FO R AN ALYSIS
By using the principles and practices of textual analysis espoused by ecocriti

cism, ecocritics assert that readers will become involved in a re-evaluation of
their own assumptions concerning nature, humanity, and the environment.
k
*cocritkt*vn 157
> 1 ^ aw; r' ; eif the following H -

ng. aSk y ao by nature," both in a given text and in our world?
^ dntw>* Porttayed attxTportrayed in relationship with nature?

^ : r ^ ch ataC ' er! In teract w ith nanrre?
H ovV th e cVvaraCêr :thv the characters. (humanity) affects the
HO" ^ nature * * * * how the n u c r o c -
. S - > r * * r ,^
ra n g e d "110
13 . Ecocriticism
t . ,r _______ 4c to p ro tectin g an d reclaim-
238
Cbi' P L nCtive in reSar nfitself to th e "s o w hat"
n A.larinK bC P mt ccocr.u cism op cri tics asU, " S o w hat?
Byture M'd **hc e''V'r "'e c o c ritic a l essay, ^ sch o la rs, actually affect
m s n* ,n After reading an readers, critics, iron m en t o r its world?
What happens? Hon- can w n (reat8 lhe physic sig n ifican t difference
any change in how humanity rnaKe an? _____ rpsnnnco -
Does or can such ' ' ^ L ^ reading or a read er-o rien ted resp on se to a
than, let us say, a New Critic ? , positions a n d an alyses turn lit
text? In other words, how can eco cr.tic.sm s po urn llt.
erary analysis into political action in t e n? ^criticism h a s little if
Critics of ecocriticism also point out that eco cr.tic.sm h a s little if any the
ory of its own; it simply borrows a bit of theory from o n e sch ool of thought
and adds a second to its beliefs from an oth er, w h ile co n tin u in g to add
thoughts and beliefs from rather diverse an d so m e tim e s co n trad icto ry
philosophies and theories. One leading sch o lar-critic, P a trick D . M urphy,
states this concern rather bluntly, noting that too m u ch of eco criticism 's the
ory "remains theoretically unsophisticated." A n d too often , h e n otes, "there
ory
remains an anti-theoretical, naive, realist attitude e xp ressed " in the writings
ren ics. Stephanie Sarver, another critic-scholar, a d d s th at ecocriti
of the ecocritics
cism is not a theory at all, but simply a focus on one top ic, the environm ent
4 -w o
In addition critics of ecocriticism point out that ^ o r r i H r i s m 'ss phenome-
ecocriticism nhpnnm p.
nal growth in the 1990s and into the first decade of the tw en ty-first century
has both positive and negative results. Initially, eco criticism em b raced dr-
verse perspectives, theories, and practices to develop an d articu late its chief
concerns about the natural world. Interestingly, som e of their initial concerns
about awakening readers to environmental concerns h av e already been ac
complished. What now is ecocriticism's prim ary task?
Accompanying this attack on criticism are the w o rd s of L eo M arx,
American studies scholar at MIT and author of The M a c h in e in the Garden:
Technology and the Pastoral Ideal in A m erica (1 9 6 4 ), a m o n g o th er notable
works. Marx writes, "Ecocentrists are the Puritans of to d a y 's environment
movement, critical of anyone w hether an en v iro n m en talist or a de
spoiler who assumes that the chief reason for protecting the environment is
its usefulness to human beings."
Ecocriticism will continue to grow in popularity am on g literary scholars
and in literary studies. And as this field of inquiry exp an ds and continues to
challenge readers anthropocentric ideas, it is positioning itself to redirect its
focus toward that of stewardship, encouraging its read ers to becom e war
dens of their one and only home: planet Earth
See Readings on Literary Criticism at the back of the text for an example
of a carefully crafted and poignant ecocritical essay, "John Keats and Nature:
An Ecocritical Inquiry, by Charles Ngiewih TEKE
Literary sp*.
fe L -E C T l O N
Y oung G oodm anj r o w n n ^
by Nathaniel Hawthorne
Young Goodman Brown came forth at sunspf a.
but put his head back, after crossing the threshold toVxchf f Salem vi,la8e;
with his young wife. And Faith, as the wife was antlv n* partin8 kiss
pretty head into the street, letting the wind ^ b o ' T
cap, while she called to Goodman Brown P ibbons of her
"Dearest heart," whispered she, softly and rather sadly, when her lins
were close to h,s ear, prithee put off your journey until sunrise and sleep to
your own bed to-night. A lone woman is troubled with such dreams and
such thoughts, that she's afeard of herself sometimes. Pray tarry with me
this night, dear husband, of all nights in the year!"
"My love and m y Faith," replied young Goodman Brown, "of all nights
in the year, this one night must I tarry away from thee. My journey, as thou
callest it, forth and back again, must needs be done 'twixt now and sunrise.
What, my sweet, pretty wife, dost thou doubt me already, and we but three
months married!"
"Then God bless you !" said Faith with the pink ribbons, "and may you
find all well, when you come back."
"Amen!" cried Goodman Brown. "Say thy prayers, dear Faith, and go to
bed at dusk, and no harm will come to thee."
So they parted; and the young man pursued his way until, being about to
turn the comer by the meeting-house, he looked back and saw the head of Faith
still peeping after him, with a melancholy air, in spite of her pink ribbons.
"Poor little Faith!" thought he, for his heart smote him. "What a wretch
am I, to leave her on such an errand! She talks of dreams, too. e '
she spoke, there was trouble in her face, as if a dream a warne
work is to be done tonight. But no, no! 'twould kill her to flunk
a blessed angel on earth; and after this one night, I'll cling to her skirts
h iec* m making more haste on his present evil purpos ^ barely stood
darkened by all the gloomiest trees of the Lhind.
to let the narrow path creep through, and closed mimed,ate y
239
Literary this peculiarity in such a solitude,
240 . . . . . , nd there is this F ,he innumerable trunks
*- * ' T - 5 S witM onely footsteps he may ye, be
that the traveller kno* * ""rhcad; so th-
and the thick b o u g h s ^ b c h in d e v e r y tree: saidI G o o d m a n
t Z - - r S " hdian h e ^ ^ ^ m . as he added, "What
"There may be a dcV; , 4 fearfully t * ,
^ ^ S X ^ ^ r S o ^ h B row n, approach, and

a, the foot ofano^ de with him of , he Old South was
WaX r . ^ G o o d yman Brown/'said h e T U e ^
striking as I came through Bosto",and ung m an , w ith a tremor in
his ; r - of h is com pam on' 8 not

wholly unexpected. forest and deepest in that p art of it where
It was now deep dusk in the > be discerned, the second trav-
these two were journeying. A s in the sam e rank of life as Goodman
eller was about fifty years ' PP ^ blance to him , though perhaps more
Brown, and bearing a have been taken for father and
in expression than features, btill tney migm
on And yet, though the elder person was as.sim p ly clad as the younger
and as simple in manner too, he had an indescribable air of one w h o knew the
world, and would not have felt abashed at the governor s dinner-table, or in
King William's court, were it possible that his affairs should call him thither.
But the only thing about him that could be fixed upon as rem arkable w as his
staff, which bore the likeness of a great black snake, so curiously w rought, that
it might almost be seen to twist and wriggle itself like a living serpent. This, of
course, must have been an ocular deception, assisted by the uncertain light.
Come, Goodman Brown," cried his fellow-traveller, this is a dull pace
for the beginning of a journey. Take my staff, if you are so soon w eary."
"Friend," said the other, exchanging his slow p ace for a full stop , "having
kept covenant by meeting thee here, it is my purpose n ow to return whence
I came. I have scruples, touching the matter thou w o t'st of."
on, nevertheless! r e L n C a s ^ g ^ a n d T " 1 " 1 -1 1 " 8 T f

turn back We are but a little way in the forest y e , ^
walk. "My father neveTwem hU o^hf w o ^ " ' U nconsciously resum ing his
ther before him. We have been a ra ( ? d s on su ch a n e rran d , nor his fa-
since the days of the martyrs- anH ! v . , , n e s t m en an d g o o d Christians,
that ever took this path and kept " ^ 1 ^ the firSt of the n am e of Brown
rupting h is pau se7 " W e l l ' s a i c ^ G b s e r v e d th e e ld e r p e r s o n , inter-

o m an B row n! I h a v e been as well
Litei
acquainted with y o u r fa m ily as ev,.r a *rary Select-
trifle to say. I h elped you r g ran d f'th am hg t h e r. 41
Quaker w o m a n s o sm artly ^ ,he c>nt, Puriln; and
b r o u g h t y o u r father a pilch-pine k n , , ! ^ Slreet o f s '? ' Wht'n he i J o , "
loan Indian village, in K i n g ? * ' ki"dled at l'm' And w a. n he
and many a pleasant walk have w e h ' T Thoy W e ^ * '" ht'"dh, | a,,,'!''11
rily alter midnight. , would fain be
" I f it be as thou sayest," replied G o o d ^ n ^ r 011' f their sake"
spoke of these matters; or, verily, I marvel not s e e iZ \ VS?*?1tht- they never
the sort would have driven them from New' E n e l ? w * 6 east rumor of
prayer and good works to boot and abide no such wickedness^ Pe P'e f
"Wickedness or not, said the traveller with twisted h
general acquaintance here in New England THp Hn * 7 ' 1 have a very
have drunk the com m union wine wifh me; ^ e se ecTmen o M ^ 3 ^
ruakeme their chairm an; and a majority of the
firm supporters of my mterest. The governor and I, to o -B u t these are state
secrets.
" Can, ,bJ Su ef !" Cried G" ^ ma,n Brown' w i,h a Stare of amazement
at his undisturbed companion. Howbeit, I have nothing to do with the gov
ernor and council; they have their own ways, and are no rule for a simple
husbandman like me. But, were I to go on with thee, how should I meet the
eye of that good old man, our minister, at Salem village? Oh, his voice would
make me tremble, both Sabbath-day and lecture-day!"
Thus far, the elder traveller had listened with due gravity, but now burst
into a fit of irrepressible mirth, shaking himself so violently that his snake
like staff actually seemed to wriggle in sympathy.
"Ha! ha! ha!" shouted he again and again; then composing himself, "Well,
go on, Goodman Brown, go on; but, prithee, don't kill me with laughing!"
"Well, then, to end the m atter at once," said Goodman Brown, consider
ably nettled, "there is m y wife, Faith. It would break her dear little heart; and
I'd rather break m y ow n !"
"Nay, if that be the ca se ," answ ered the other, "e'en go thy ways,
Goodman Brown. I w ould not, for twenty old women like the one hobbling
before us, that Faith should com e to any harm."
As he spoke, he pointed his staff at a female figure on the path, in whom
Goodman Brown recognized a very pious and exemplary dame, who a
taught him his catechism in youth, and was still his moral and spiritua a
viser, jointly w ith th e m in is te r a n d D eaco n Gookin.
"A marvel, truly, that G oody Cloyse should be so far in t e wi ornos '
nightfall," said he. "But, with your leave, friend, I shall take a cut th_ g
woods, until we have left this Christian woman behtnd. emg g w
you, she might ask w hom I w as consorting with, and whither g g-
"Be it so " said his fellow-traveller. "Betake you to the woods, and let me
keeP the path."
*1 10. OOVS'lo ooo but took care to watch his com.
, man tm'*1 *'ti|he ha
liogly "
A^mllWty the y_ h v uloi'B
y;' ,,uy u|0ng the rm n,king
m;lkinc the best of her vway, witll
pauiou. who j s,u,y..'0o w l o l e , wing some indistinct' words-_
englh ol the ' d" ' , wom.m, and . forth his staff anc
and touched
,U s, v d orsoos ' w(. , 1 hetrae I hr P s ^
-'ttn U * % * * went- tail.
a prayer, doul <_ wll, seemed II t J
hi
" n t d ^ U " screamed f* < * " * * +
llrenC.W'y C^y H^ hisWri,hing cricd tbc good d
fnm' Ah fmsoth,and is it old gossip, Goodman Brow^

-Yea truly is it, and in the vejT '"V h noW But, would your worship be-
the grandfather of the silly fc J , disappeared, stolen, as I suspect, by
lieveit?-my broomstick hath stra g y ^ (00 when , was a|, anointed
that unhanged witch. Goo y ^ efoj, and wolf's-bane "
with the juice of smallage a 4 Qf a new -born b a b e /' said the
"Mingled with fine wheat and tne ra
Sâ*-Ah 'your worship knows the recipe," cried the old lady cackling aloud.
"So as^ was saving being all ready for the meeting, and no horse to nde on,
I de up my mind to foot it; for they tell me them is a race young man to be
!5 taken into communion tonight. But now your good w orsh.p will lend me
your arm, and we shall be there in a twinkling.
"That can hardly be," answered her friend. "I will not spare you my arm,
Goody Cloyse, but here is my staff, if you will.
So saying, he threw it down at her feet, where, perhaps, it assumed life,
being one of the rods which its owner had formerly lent to the Egyptian magi.
Of this fact, however, Goodman Brown could not take cognizance. He had
cast up his eyes in astonishment, and looking down again, beheld neither
Goody Cloyse nor the serpentine staff, but his fellow-traveller alone, who
waited for him as calmly as if nothing had happened.
"That old woman taught me my catechism!" said the young man; and
there was a world of meaning in this simple comment.
They continued to walk onward, while the elder traveller exhorted his
compamon to make good speed and persevere in the path, discoursing so
dhor than ls^ r8uments seemed radler to spring up in the bosom of his au
ditor, than to be suggested by himself.
and b e g a n k T s trin 'h ^ fW 3 branch maPle to serve for a walking-stick,

evening dew Themnm WJ^S ^ llttle bouSbs/ which were wet with
wUherc-d and dried up as with a S ' ^ h l n e . h6 "16 Slra" gely
hollow of the road^G^Sman Browd cm P1Ce' Until suddenly ,in a Sloom>

and refused to go any farther. ^ himself down on the stump of a tree
will I budge on this mmd is made UP- Not another step

h errand. What if a wretched old woman do choose to go
-V
Literary Self
Hevilitwhen
tothe d I thought she was going to heaven is that
my dear Faith and go after her?" cfi<>n 243
i "You 1vv think ^tter
__ . - of this by and hv
r . - 1 '--" * any ftas<>n why
edly. "Sit here and rest you rself a vvhil Said his ac,
in, there is m y staff to help you *> ; and when y ^ " ! ? " ? ' cmpos.
W.thout m ore w ords, he threw his r l,ke
aas^speedily
r ' out of sight^ as if he had
c I,t,a v a n S !' ? ani,,n
vanisho^ 'he manlp cu i
1 u,e
young man sat a few moments by the mad ]nto the deepen^ and was
and thinking wtth h ow clear a conscience h ^ ' aPPIaudin h?^8 [J0m The
morning walk, n o r shrink from the eve ^ Sh uld mee' t h e m , 8reaHy
what calm sleep w ould be his that verv ni [ 8 d old Deacon& 'n his
so wickedly, but purely and sweetly now f ? i Which was "> have b^ns o" ^
pIeasant and p raisew orth y meditations, Goodman^ ' Fai'h! AmidstK
of horses along the road, and deemed it a d v i c e t Wn heard the tramp
the verge of the forest, conscious of the guilty C nceal himself within
thither, though now so happily turned from it thathad bought him
On cam e the h oof-tram p s and the voices of the h
voices, con versing sob erly as they drew near Thp " tW grave old
neared to pass along the road, within a few vards nf ik! mingled sunds ap-
place; but ow ing doubtless to the depth
E ith er the travellers n or their ste /d s went & . % % %
brushed the small boughs by the wayside, it could not be seen that they in
tercepted, even for a m om ent, the faint gleam from the strip of bright sky
athwart w hich th ey m u st have passed. Goodman Brown alternately
crouched and stood on tiptoe, pulling aside the branches and thrusting forth
his head as far as he d u rst without discerning so much as a shadow. It vexed
him the more, because he could have sworn, were such a thing possible, that
he recognized the voices of the minister and Deacon Gookin, jogging along
quietly, as they w ere w ont to do, when bound to some ordination or ecclesi
astical council. W hile yet within hearing, one of the riders stopped to pluck a
switch.
"O f th e two, reverend sir," said the voice like the deacon's, "I had rather
miss an ordination dinner than to-night's meeting. They tell me that
our community are to be here from Falmouth and beyon ' an J ^ ows
Connecticut and R h od e Island, besides several o t e n ia_ P ^ ^
Who, after their fashion, know alm ost as much devi_ry cammun|on
Moreover, there is a good ly young woman oId tones of the min-
"Mighty well, D eacon Gookin. replied know, until i
Kter. "Spur up, or w e shall be late. Nothing can be done, y
get on the grou n d ." talking so strangely in the
The hoofs clattered again; and the voi ' church had ever been
empty air, passed on through the forest, vv e/ fh n could these holy men
gathered, or solitary Christian prayed. Whithe , th ^ Goodman Brown
e journeying, so deep into the heathen wi ^>rn s:nj< down on the groun
caught hold of a tree for support, being ready
244 l itot.uv Selection
. ... .1 i uu kness of his heart. H e looked ur>
fai.u and ovor-burthened with the hen y heavcn above him. Yet there
to the sky, doubting whether there really was a ncu mere
was the blue arch, and the stars brightening in , r:rm .
.............. ...... above and Faith below, I will yet stand firm against the
'With Heaven iu> ---- ,
devil!" cried Goodman Brown
* V > IV _
___
decp
While he still gazed upward, into .me h no wind was stirring, hurried
- cloud, though no wind
had lifted his hands to pray, a ^ The b)ue sky was still visible
across tne zenim enu __ Tightening
a m is s the zenith and hid the brightening stars. The bli ---------------
except directly overhead, where this black mass of .._
> u j A Aloft in the air, as if from the depths of the cloud, came 6
C Ak-VJ LI V U U V V . -v * _t t f f III I j iv> r
swiftly northward. Aloft in the air, as it T once the u listener f^nrind

fancied tbafthat he
confused and doubtful sound of vol,ce ' _ le Qf his own, men and women,
could distinguish the accents of town s P ^ ^ met at the communion table,
both pious and ungodly, many of whom moment, so indistinct were
and had seen others rioting at the ^vem. aUeht but the murmur of the
the sounds, he doubted whether ^ had heard aug ^ sweU ^
old forest, whispering without a wmd. Th villaee but never until
familiar tones, heard daily in the sunshine at Salem vil * ; ^
now, from a cloud at night. There was one voice, of a young woman, uttenng
lamentations, yet with an uncertain sorrow, and en reating for some favor,
which, perhaps, it would grieve her to obtain; and all the unseen multitude,
both saints and sinners, seemed to encourage her onward.
Faith!" shouted Goodman Brown, in a voice of agony and desperation;
and the echoes of the forest mocked him, crying, Faith! Faith! as if bewil
dered wretches were seeking her all through the wilderness.
The cry of grief, rage, and terror was yet piercing the night, when the
unhappy husband held his breath for a response. T h ere w as a scream,
drowned immediately in a louder m urm ur of v o ices fad ing into far-off
laughter, as the dark cloud swept away, leaving the clear and silent sky
above Goodman Brown. But something fluttered ligh tly d ow n through
the air and caught on the branch of a tree. The young m an seized it, and be
held a pink ribbon.
My Faith is gone!" cried he, after one stupefied moment. "There is no good
on earth; and sin is but a name. Come, devil; for to thee is this world given."
And, maddened with despair, so that he laughed loud and long, did
Goodman Brown grasp his staff and set forth again, at such a rate that he
seemed o fly along the forest path, rather than to w alk or run. The road
grew wilder and drearier and more faintly traced, and vanished at length,
leaving him in the heart of the dark wilderness, still rushing onward with
- 7 - a es mortal man to evil. The whole forest was peopled
w dh fr^htful sounds the creaking of the trees, the howling of wild beasts,
and the yell of Indians; while sometimes the wind tolled like a distant church
bell, and sometimes gave a broad roar around the traveller, as if all Nature
were laughing him to scorn. But he was himself the chief horror of the scene,
and shrank not from its other horrors.
Mlvrury Svlrrtiion 241
. i . ha? h a !" n w iv d C kxK inum H it.w n, vvlu-n n,
J * w h ich w ill la u g h lo u d c s tl flu n k fri , ''"H'w.l at him . " U t
u?X ih'h' t""":,w iz a r d , c o m e In d ia n | V w w llvv, h ' *'> y ..r deviltry
C * O HKlnuin B ro w n . V>u m a y a s w ell (,.a r hi ' , * lm ns. ll, d
tru th , a ll t h r o u g h t h e h a u n t e d tu rn s , th e n , * , I'm
b n o ,h i" *
tl,| th a n th e f ig u r e o f U s s l m a a B r o w n . O n h .
,n>*J brandishing h.s .staff with frenzied gestures n * T amon8 the black
C itio n of horrid blasphemy, and now shoutinK form 8' T ? Vent to an j"*
L echoes of the forest laughing like demons ar, ? ? Iauhter as set
J own shape is less hideous than when he rages in th^h h'm' Th<? fit>nd in
hl> i the demoniac on his course, until, quivedne am f man- 7111,8
S C f * before him, as when the felled trunks and h"8 * * * he a
* re- and ,hrow up their lurid W a a?aTnsr.h f V * " " *
^ u r of midnight. He paused, in a lull of the tempest tha! h S h ^ at the
Ird and heard the swell of w hat seemed a hymn 1 ^ h m n*
distance with the w eight of m any voices. He knew the tun?; it w ^ a m ^ r
one in the choir of the village meeting-house. The verse died heavily away
and was lengthened by a chorus not of human voices, but of all the sounds
of the benighted w ilderness pealing in awful harmony together. Goodman
Brown cried out; and his cry w as lost to his own ear, by its unison with the
cry of the desert.
' In the interval of silence he stole forward until the light glared full upon
his eyes. At one extrem ity of an open space, hemmed in by the dark wall of
the forest, arose a rock, bearing som e rude, natural resemblance either to an
altar or a pulpit, and su rrou n d ed by four blazing pines, their tops aflame,
their stems untouched, like candles at an evening meeting. The mass of fo
liage that had overgrow n the sum m it of the rock, was all on fire, blazing high
into the night and fitfully illum inating the whole field. Each pendent twig
and leafy festoon w as in a blaze. A s the red light arose and fell, a numerous
congregation alternately shone forth, then disappeared in shadow, and again
grew, as it were, out of the darkness, peopling the heart of the solitary woods
at once.
"A grave and d ark -clad co m p an y !" quoth Goodman Brown.
In truth, they w ere such. A m on g them , quivering to-and-fro between
gloom and splendor, appeared faces that would be seen next day at the council
board of the province, an d others w hich, Sabbath after Sabbath, looked de
voutly heavenward, and benignantly over the crowded pews, from t e o les
pulpits in the land. Som e affirm that the lady of the governor was t u re' ta
there were high dam es well know n to her, and wives of honored husbands, and
widows, a great m ultitude, and ancient m aidens, all o exce ^ ' .ê
tair young girls, w ho trem bled lest their mothers shou espy 10 i Goodman
sudden gleams of light flashing o v e r the obscure field b e t o l e d G d n
B'own, or he recognized a s c o re of the church members of Salem
for their especial sanctity. G ood old Deacon Cookm had a m
Literary Selection
consorting w. , ;n esand n over to au = my viCe

church, those chaste d ^wretches R'vc to see that the good shrank
k - 4
" T o E u ^ 'X h c r a ^ Goodman Brown, and, as hope came mto
"B ut, where is Faith? tno b .
VtiQheart he trembled. slow and mournful strain, such as the
Another verse of the hymn arose. ssed aU that our nature can con
pious love,but joined w worfs wtuc Unfathomable to mere mortals is
ceive of sin, and darkly ^ nte^ e^ aT su n g; and still the chorus of the desert
the lore of fiends. Verse after verse ^ &mighty organ; and, with the final
swelled between like thedeepe &SQUnd/ as if the roaring wind, the
peal of that dreadful anthem nd every other voice of the uncon-
rushing streams, the howling ' ording with the voice of guilty man
verted wilderness were rnrng ^ blazing pines threw up a loftier flame,
in homage to the prmce o visages of horror on the smoke wreaths
and obscurely discovered shapes ^ mQment the fire on the rock shot
T T y T r T T PdTrmcd a glowing arch above its base, where now appeared a
figure With reverence be if spoken, Ihe figure bore no slight smuhtude, both
in8 garb and manner, to some g rav e divine of the New England churches
"Bring forth the converts'." cried a voice, that echoed through the field
and rolled into the forest.
At the word, Goodman Brown stepped forth from the shadow of the trees
and approached the congregation, with whom he felt a loathful brotherhood
by the sympathy of all that was wicked in his heart. He could have well nigh
sworn that the shape of his own dead father beckoned him to advance, look
ing downward from a smoke wreath, while a woman, with dim features of
despair, threw out her hand to warn him back. Was it his mother? But he had
no power to retreat one step, nor to resist, even in thought, when the minister
and good old Deacon Gookin seized his arms and led him to the blazing rock.
Thither came also the slender form of a veiled female, led between Goody
Cloyse, that pious teacher of the catechism, and Martha Carrier, who had re
ceived the devil's promise to be queen of hell. A rampant hag was she. And
there stood the proselytes beneath the canopy of fire.
"Welcome, my children," said the dark figure, "to the communion of
your race! Ye have found, thus young, your nature and your destiny. My
children, look behind you!"
They turned; and flashing forth, as it were, in a sheet of flame, the fiend-
worshippers were seen; the smile of welcome gleamed darkly on every visage.
\
ct
*ri!
n, ^ ........... 7 uesr' to an infant's f,,n " T graves 111 * e gar-

By the sympa thy of y ou r hum an hearts for <? * * L 8
places whether in ch u rch , bed-cham ber, s t r e e t T ^ out ^ * e
crime has been com m itted, and shall exult to beh , a , ' r fores t - w h e r e
stain of g u ilt on e m ig h ty b lo o d -sp o t. F a r m o re than h f Carth one
penetrate, in every bosom , the deep m ystery of s n i * S^ 1J be y urs to
picked arts, and w hich inexhaustibly supplies ' the funtain of all
human power than m y pow er at its u tm o s t-c a n ^ imP u]ses than
And now, my children, look upon each other " ke manifest in deeds.
They did so; and, by the blaze of the hell-kinHi a
man beheld his Faith, and the wife her husband * the wretched
hallowed altar. Husband, trembling before that un-
"Lo! there ye stand, m y children," said the figure in a ^
tone, almost sad, with its despairing awfulness as if h deep and solemn
could yet mourn for ou r m iserable race. "DenenH- *S nCe angelic nafure
hearts, ye had still hoped that virtu e w ere not al'l"8 VP n one m o th er's
undeceived. Evil is the nature of mankind Evil m .,sf Now are ye
^ W e lc o m e a g a in , m y children, ,o the communion of y o T ^ haPP~
"Welcome! repeated the fiend-w orshipners in / ;
and triumph. ' one c rY despair
And there they stood, the only pair as if cô .
ing on the verge o f w ickedness in this dark world A bas^ iT w T sT
naturally, in the rock. Did it contain water, reddened bv the 7
P Hqmd flam e? HiêhTdfd^he shape of ^ i l dip
his hand, and prepare to lay the m ark of baptism upon their foreheads t h S
theymight be partakers of the m ystery o f sin, more conscious of the secret
amd e e ? and thOUght' than they could HOW be o fT h S r
iT h 77,eth sband cast one look *1 his pale wife, and Faith at him. What po!-
alk eawhat
likeat T 6hhthey
MW OA !ke neXt
disclosed and8,anCe Sh Wsaw!
what they them to each other/ shuddering
8
WickedOnef"lth! the h u sb a n d - "L o o k up to Heaven, and resist the
f a r S i r|lF^ hd b1yed ' hu kneW n 0 t' H ardly had he sPol:<!n' when he

amid calm night and solitude, listening to a roar of the wind
248 Literary Selection
which died heavily away through the forest. H e .8t? K* ? d' a8aint
rock, and felt it chill and damp; while a hanging twig, that had been all ^
fire, besprinkled his cheek with the coldest ew.
The next morning young Goodman Brown came slowly into the street ^
Salem village, staring around him like a bewildered man. The good old r r w
ter was taking a walk along the grave-yard to get an appetite for breakfast and
meditate his sermon, and bestowed a blessing, as he passed, on Goodman
Brown. He shrank from the venerable saint as if to avoid an anathema. Old
Deacon Gookin was at domestic worship, and the holy words of his prayer
were heard through the open window. What God doth the wizard pray to?"
quoth Goodman Brown. Goody Cloyse, that excellent old Christian, stood in
the early sunshine at her own lattice, catechising a little girl who had brought
her a pint of morning's milk. Goodman Brown snatched away the child as
from the grasp of the fiend himself. Turning the com er by the meeting house
he spied the head of Faith, with the pink ribbons, gazing anxiously forth, and
bursting into such joy at the sight of him that she skipped along the street and
almost kissed her husband before the whole village. But Goodman Brown
looked sternly and sadly into her face, and passed on without a greeting
Had Goodman Brown fallen asleep in the forest, and only dreamed a
wild dream of a witch-meeting?
Be it so, if you will; but, alas! it was a dream of evil omen for youne
Goodman Brown. A stem, a sad, a darkly meditative, a distrustful, if not
desperate, man did he become, from the night of that fearful dream. On the
Sabbath day, when the congregation were singing a holy psalm, he could not
listen, because an anthem of sin rushed loudly upon his ear and drowned all
the blessed strain. When the minister spoke from the pulpit, with power and
fervid eloquence and with his hand on the open Bible, of the sacred truths of
our religion, and of saint-like lives and trium phant deaths, and of future
bliss or misery unutterable, then did Goodm an Brown turn pale, dreading
est the roof should thunder down upon the gray blasphemer and his hear-
ers Often, awaking suddenly at m idnight, he shrank from the bosom of
Faith and at morning or eventide, when the family knelt down in prayer, he
scowled, and muttered to himself, and gazed sternly at his wife, and turned
away. And when he had lived long, and w as borne to his grave a hoary
r ^ o d l v D^ces by Fav!th'Hn aged Woman' and children and grandchildreZ
verse urion hk t T . ^ f S e*8hbors not a few, the
verse upon his tombstone; for his dying hour was gloom.
pjrADlNGS ON LITERARY CRITICISM
this selection o f p ro fe s s io n a l e s s a y s , y o u w ill f;nH

uîoed *cV
lay th e fo u n d a tio n f o r th e ir re s p e ctiv e ^ h ^ ] C erSt n e esays
^ h eheipeu
l p e d lay
their theoretical a s s u m p t i o n s , m eth o d o lr> -J -------
T he FormalistC r it ic s /' b y C le a n th B r o o k ? * 8' 3 n d
for New m
sict,rCa s s e r t i n g th a t lit e r * p ro v id es "s o m e a r r , AfSt essay
with the w o rk its e lf ." T h e s e c o n d e s t j b' " c o n c e r t
Discourse o f th e H u m a n S c ie n c e s "v / '
b S tru
r f p oststru ctu ralism o r P o s t m o d e m i t ^ / ^ ? D errt* > . fc th e p iv o te le ' h e
definitive sta te m e n ts b e c a u s e n o t h i n g * staW M serts w e fan n o , sy
always con tin g en t a n d a m b ig u o u s . T h e th h d m ean in S- d eclares D ereH "
fhe Idea o f U n iv e r s e ,ity in U t e r a t u r e ," 7* *
reader to p o stco lo n ia lism , d e c la r in g th at " r L L a rs n , i n t r o d u c e ? ? '
h ir e ... is to sh o w u s s o m e th in g w e w e m h p u r P o se f a n y p iece 0 f ^
hteratureis"a v o y a g e in to a p r e v io u s ly u n tfa v H o f" a n d ^
Queer T heory" b y A n n a m a r ie J a g o s e ,^ f Urth
word queer a n d q u e er theory, m a in ta in in g o f the
under c o n s tr u c tio n ." A n d t h e fift h e s s a v ** * ? * an idenHty
EcocnticalInquiry," b y C h a rle s N g ie w ih T E K F ^ an d N a tu re: A n
pie o f the
century p rin c ip le s a n d p r a c t ic e s o f e c o c r ih
text. d s m aa p^p rlied to a n in eteen th --
n cism
Table o f C o n ten ts
"The F o rm a list C r itic s "
C leanth Brooks
'Structure, S ig n , a n d P la y in th e D is c o u rs e o f th e H u m a n S cien ces"

Jacq u es D errida
; T h e Id ea o f U n iv e rsa lity in L iteratu re'

'Heroic E n th o cen trism
C h arles Larson
"Queer T h e o ry " A nnam arie Jagose
"John Keats an d N a tu re , a n E c o critica l In q u iry

C h arles N giew ih TEK E
249
m -' f f f -i s y
E*'V
***** M v.*r*''t*i:*ff:~*'
Uu-rary Critidsm
2S0 Reading# n
F o rm a U s tC n ti
"T h e
by ClcanthBrooks
scribe to: T hat lite ra ry c ritic is m is a [
Here are some * j its object. problem o f u n it y the kind of
* - s r
^ r t - o ' S o H l t ' i " ' S ' * 'V ' J' ^ r t n ; i^ ' ' ' re m ^ l' C,U^ ' b' ' ' K ' ' 0in'!' e* '
That the formal relations in a work of
ceed, those o f logic. , rnntentcannot be separ
That in a successful work, form and content
That form is meaning. i ml and symbolic.
That
That literature
the generalis and
ultimthe
ately t not seizea up byy a b s tra c tio n , but got
me a p are
universal g atat
through the concrete and the particular.
That literature is not a surrogatefor religion ..... , . , ,
That, as Allen Tate2 says, "sp ecie moral problems are the subject matter o/l-
erature, but that the purpose of literature is not o p o iti ... . .
That the principles of criticism define the area relevant to literary criticism; they
do not constitute a method fo r carrying out the c ritic is m .
Such statements as these w ould not, how ever, ev en th o u g h greatly elab
orated, serve any useful purpose here. The interested rea d er alread y knows
the general nature of the critical position ad u m brated or, if h e d oes not, he
can find it set forth in writings of m ine or of other critics o f lik e sympathy.
M oreover, a condensed restatem ent of the p o sitio n h e r e w o u ld probably
beget as many m isunderstandings as h av e p ast a tte m p ts to se t it forth. It
seem s m uch more profitable to use the p resen t o c c a sio n fo r d ealin g with
som e persistent m isunderstandings and objections.
In the first place, to make the poem or the n o v el th e ce n tra l concern of
criticism has appeared to mean cutting it loose from its a u th o r and from his
life as a m an, w ith his own particular hop es, fears, in tere sts, conflicts, etc. A
criticism so lim ited may seem blood less and h ollow . It w ill seem so to the
typical professor of literature in the graduate sch o o l, w h e re the study of lit
erature is still prim arily a study of the ideas and p erso n a lity of the author as
re.vea e in 1S etters' bis d iaries, and the re c o rd e d co n v e rsa tio n s of his
n en s. w i certain y seem so to literary gossip co lu m n ists w ho purvey lit
erary chitchat. It may also seem so to the y o u n g p o et or n o v elist, beset with
his ow n problem s of com position and w ith h is stru g g les to find a subject and
a style and to get a hearing for him self.
frn m ^ h o t SeC? nd P jaC<T' t0 ^ p b a s i z e the w o rk seem s to involve severing it
t ose w ho actually read it, and this sev era n ce m ay seem drastic and
'O riginally published in the Kenyon Reniezo in a series titled "M y Credo "
American editor, poet, novelist, and critic (1899-1979) Y
Readings on Literary Criticism 251
Alter all, literature is writtet\ to be read. Wordsworth's
, d i ^ tr US making to nu*n. In each Sunday Time*, Mr. J. Donald
hetetote a man S^.hat the hungry sheep look up and are not fed; and le
ot>ints Ut than Mr. Adams are bound to feel a proper revulniolid
f* \ ^ s . rfioral^4^ Moreover, if , , we neglect
, the audience
a p ro p eu.- *- m*-.H
r revulsion
H
rjr4
, ,tw for
............... which
V T r ' it wasnm ~,c
u 8k ' d i<'"ce which read* on
-~th-e au
! nL u , d . n g th a t fo r w h ic h it w a s p re su m a b ly w ritten , the literary his-
% lrk' n ip t to p o in t o u t th a t th e k in d o f a u d ie n ce th at P op e 5 had did con -
* p c ;n d o f p o e t r y t h a t h e w r o te . T h e p o e m h as its roots in history, past
I pen the k e in th e h is to r ic a l c o n te x t sim p ly can n o t be ignored.
a present* 1 K t h e s e o b je c tio n s a s s h a r p ly a s I c a n b ecau se I a m sym p a-
a \ hav e s s ta te o f m i n d w h ic h is p r o n e to v o ic e th em . M an 's experience
. * a m lo s s g a r m e n t , n o p a r t o f w h ic h c a n b e sep arate d from the
a St? r g e th is f a c t o f in s e p a ra b ility a g a in s t the d raw in g o f distinc-
15 Yet if w e u nQ p o i n t in ta lk in g a b o u t criticism a t all. I am assum ing
then thenrs6 a re n e c e s s a r y a n d u s e fu l a n d in d e e d inevitable.
[hat distin ctl c r itic ^ o w s a s w e ll a s a n y o n e th a t p o e m s and p lays and
The fo rm a 1 m e n __ th a t th e y d o n o t so m e h o w h app en and that they
noVels
are are was
written ritte n ressio
ex p y io n n gs ^ p
r a r tic u la r p erso n alities an
êrsonaiities an d
d are
ara w ritten
. from
r all
sorts of m otives fo forr m o on
n eey y , ffro
r o m a d eesiresire to eexpress oneself for the
x p re ss oneself, h " sake
^ off a
cause,uxetc. M -------
oreover,J .h ffo
the o rm
r m a lis
listt ccritic
ritic kknown o w s aas s wwellell aass an yone that
anyone literary
thaflber
works;are ^ j y p
m erely p oo te
te n
n tia
tia ll uuntil
n til thth eeyy are
a r e rr ee a
add -- tt h
h aa tt is,
i* *that
*...........
they are r e p e a t e d
i the minds o f actu al rea d e rs, w h o v ary enorm ously in their capabilities th e ir
interests, their p re ju d ice s, th e ir ideas. But the form alist critic is concerned pri
manly w ith th e w o rk its e lf. S p ecu la tio n on the m ental processes o f the author
takes the critic a w a y fro m th e w o rk in to biography and psychology. T h ere is
no reason, o f co u rse, w h y h e sh o u ld n o t turn aw ay into biography and psy
chology. Such ex p lo ra tio n s are v ery m u ch w orth making. But they should not
be confused w ith an a cc o u n t o f th e w ork. Such studies describe the process of
composition, n o t th e stru c tu re o f the thing com posed, and they may be per
formed quite as v a lid ly fo r th e p o o r w ork as fo r th e g o o d o n e. T h ey m ay b e
validly p e r fo r m e d f o r a n y k in d o f e x p r e s s io n non-literary as well as literary.
Chi the o th e r h a n d , e x p lo r a t io n o f th e various readings which the work
has received a lso ta k e s th e c r it ic a w a y fro m the w ork into psychology and
the history o f ta ste. T h e v a rio u s im p o rts o f a g iv e n w o rk m a y w ell b e worth
studying. I. A . R ic h a rd s h a s p u t u s all in h is d e b t b y dem onstrating what dif
ferent experiences m a y b e d e r i v e d fr o m the sam e p o e m b y an apparently ho
mogeneous g ro u p o f r e a d e r s ;6 a n d th e scholars have p o in ted o ut, all along,
Jee william WORDSWORTH (17 7 0 -1 8 5 0 ), p r e f a c e to L y ric a l Ballads (1800; abov e). ...
kw s Donald Adams (1891-1968), author and editor, best known for his weekly column (wh,eh
i ? * >>943) in the N ew York Times Book Review. "The hungry sheep look up and are not
line 125 of John Milton's "lycidas (1637), a pastoral elegy for the poet Edward King.
^ xahder pope (168&-1744), English poet and satirist. , /1Q9Ql hv the English
f ers here > C riticism : A Study o f Literary lodgm ent (1929). by the Enghs
and theorist Richards (1893-1979).
Rifling* on Uter.uy OitUbm
252 , . . nn i8th C en tu ry as compared with *
= K X n > . y d iv c -W " ' the estimates of John
1 . * KiMtorical period. But such work
from a criticism of
v.uu.um o......... criticiz e the w o,i
.he work ..self. The formal,*. L>s ,h at tn e relevan t p art , 7 *
itself, makes two assumptions, (1) l Ck/ . . . u \u work* th at is hp
author's intention is what he got actually aSSUlês
that the author's intention as realized is the intention n ts' not nec
essarily what he was conscious of trying to d o, o r w h at h e n o w rem em bers
he was then trying to do. And (2) the formalist critic assu m es an ideal reader:
that is, instead of focusing on the varying spectrum of possible readings, he
attempts to find a central point of reference from w h ich h e ca n focu s upon
the structure
itructure of the poem or novel.
But there is
But there is no ideal reader,
no ideal reader, someone
so .-------- is prom pt to p o in t o u t, an d he will
piuuauij -----
blindsides and prejudices, to p
There is no ideal reader,
'
*1rl-
_i----- ormaance that allow s th e critic, w ith his o
. Viim^pll in tnC UUMUWII of' *--------------------
' a t ideal
reader
SUDpose th at th e p ra ctisin g critic can
--
h is re a d in g an d th e "tru e"
never be too often remm e ^ of focusin g u p o n th e p o e m rather
reading of the poem. P . ^ e strategy. F in ally , o f cou rse, it is
than upon his own reactions, it is a d e le n s iu ie siia icg y j, ,
the strategy that all critics of w hatever persu asion are fo rced to ad opt. (The
alternatives are desperate: either w e say th at o n e p e r s o n s re a d in g s is as
good as another's and equate those readings on a b a sis o f a b so lu te equality
and thus deny the possibility of any standard read ing. O r e lse w e take a low
est common denominator of the various readings th at b a v e b e e n m ad e; that
is, we frankly move from literary criticism into so cio -p sy ch o lo g y . To propose
taking a consensus of the opinions of "q u a lified rea d e rs is sim p ly to split
the ideal reader into a group of ideal readers.) As co n seq u en ces of the distinc
tion just referred to, the formalist critic rejects tw o p o p u la r te sts for literary
value. The first proves the value of the w ork from th e a u th o r 's "sin cerity "
(or the intensity of the author's feelings as he co m p o sed it). If w e heard that
Mr. Guest testified that he put his heart and sou l in to b is p o e m s, w e would
not be very much impressed, though I should see n o re a so n to d ou bt such a
statem ent from Mr. Guest. It w ould sim ply b e c ritic a lly irre le v a n t. Ernest
H em ingw ay's statem ent in a recent issue of T im e m a g a z in e th at h e counts
his last novel his best is of interest for H e m in g w a y 's b io g ra p h y , b u t most
read ers o f A cross the R iver and Into the Trees w o u ld a g re e That it proves
nothing a, all about the value of the n o v e l - t h a t in th is ca se th e judgment
,s sim ply pathetically inept. We discount also su ch te sts fo r p oetry as that
7English poet (1576-1631).
' t L ^ Z e Z l :' 1 P PUlar U,hUI " Poem s w ere published daily

HAcross the River and into the Trees received harch .....
Hemingway (1899-1961), American writer of faction ^ Published in 195
KoulinK on l.lw*
Mposed by A. E. Housmnn ,wthe bn\st||n 2M
S 5 P* m' The i:, '," ,si'jv " V ,is l>-nrj ,
as we have already lenr,,,.,) , "" lri*hl J- n\Out reading of a
f \
i'h.,1 tolls
te lls us
u s is
is somethin*?
s o m e th in g a h t | ,ru.si l,s.^ h
M m Hignilitnn<
****" '*y in
;
It* is u n f o r t u n a t e if t h is p l a y i n g d o w n ab o u t
lain 'an ity o r r e a d e r . T h e e r t f e . * " * * " ...

-------- - - i ne critic m , T ' ' ns<s ^'ems to denv
niiuhand may be indeed inu
lurrassment in admitting thetensely moved by them l,<,y C,'r,,,in Worl wry
. e fact; but a detailed de^- im"' ' I ' hove
""on reading certain works has little to do will, iH of ">y emotional
n ^ w h a t the work is and how the parts of7 ,ire an in"
1 h- - -
STof r T,r Wi" f Pend ,heTn and the
practice, the c n t.e s ,o b .s rarely a purely critical one. He is much more I ke "

l be involved in d o zen s o f m ore o r less related tasks, some of them trivia!
some o f them im p ortant. H e m ay b e trying to get a hearing for a new author'
or t0 get the a tten tio n o f the freshm an sitting in the back row. He may be
c o m p a s s tw o au th o rs, o r ed itin g a text, writing a brief newspaper review
or reading a p ap er b efo re the M o d em Language Association.11 He may even
be simply talk in g w ith a frien d , talking about literature for the hell of it.
Parable, anecdote, ep ig ram , m etaphor these and a hundred other devices
av be thoroughly leg itim ate for his varying purposes. He is certainly not to
be asked to su pp ress h is p erso n al enthusiasm s or his interest in social history
or in politics. L east o f all is h e being asked to present his criticisms as the close
adine of a text. Tact, co m m o n sense, and uncommon sense if he has it, are
aii requisite if the p ractisin g critic is to do his various jobs well
But it will do the critic no harm to have a clear idea of what his specific job
by the college lectu rer o f infectiou s en u âturday Review of L itera tu re.

Month Club bulletins, and in the co um ns , h j think an important, role.
I have assigned the critic a m odes , practising artist,
With reference to the h elp w h ich the critic can give P
10 nd Nature of Poetry
x,sjjy
Classical
-. scholar
. and .poet (1859-1936). H o u smart
sm a"^sidtt'uJu om
m vine. to keep watch over my
* ----------------------
(1933): "Exper-----
ôughts '
^ >6nence âs fought me, when I am sh av in g o f a m orning, to k eep watch over my
ceaspe ause' ^ a hne o f p o e t r y stray s in to m y m em ory; m y skin bristles so that the razor
Noughts,
ceases be<
to act. i oreanization for scholar in EnK>ish jnd fortM>?n
The primary North Am erican professions
languages and literatures.
Literary C riticism '
2M KwkMnR* on an K,
^-n give
only
negative
vt help.
llc lP-
L,Ht. Ah critic have no formula to offer. Perhaps
L * hflV le work has suc-
te n d to g o h an d
t t e r o ff fo r b e in g
^ v ,n s id e r a tio n s a r e n e v e r
H i .E v e r y t h i n g - - ; ^ . u, h p r o p e r a d v i c e could
ich w ill' a v ,f ' ' special, a n d in a g lV " . , s c i c n c e o r h isto ry or
equal, the case is a l w a y s ^ ' th er, o r * * d P * *
b e: quit reading c r i h o J o r j()in th e c h u -f g ific a n d p o s i t i v e h e lp
philosophy o r I " " d o u b t th a t th e k 'n s e v e r a l w r i t e r s o f o u r tim e
T here is certain ly ^ ^ , 2 w a s ab le to g>ve th a t th e re
that som eone like ^ ra . o rta n t k in d o f c r i
can be. I think
^ a v e d e s c r i b e d : t h e r e is
r ; r,?s S l m l a t e d to the * * * % % & is b ein g b u ilt u p , th e sam e

m e sam e in ten se co n ce rn w ith th e t e x t o th c r th in g s a re i n v o l v e d -
co n cern w ith technical p r o b le m * . o f c ritid s m a lto g e th e r am o n g
m atters w hich lie ou tsid e th e s p e c m r t i c u l a r w r i t e r , t h e a b ility to
them a know ledge of the p e rso n a l ty o t P
stim ulate, to m ake positive su g g e s d o c u m e n t c a n b e a n a l y s e d in
A literary w o rk is a d o c u m e n t a n d a s a ^ m a n i p u i a t e d a s a fo rce
terms of the forces that have pro uc , the future. These facts it
in its own right. It mirrors th e does d th em . But the
would be futile to deny, and 1 know ot no critic co n stitu te literarv
reduction of a work of literature to its causes does n o t co n stitu te literary
criticism; nor does an estimate of its effects. G ood literatu re is m ore than
effective rhetoric applied to true ideas e v e n if w e c o u l d a g re e u p o n a
philosophical yardstick for measuring the tru th of id eas an d even if we
could find some way that transcended nose-counting for determ ining the ef
fectiveness of the rhetoric.
A recent essay by Lionel Trilling bears very em p h atically upon this
point.13 (1 refer to him the more readily because Trilling h as registered some
of his objections to the critical position that 1 maintain.) In the essay entitled
"The Meaning of a Literary Idea," Trilling discusses the debt to Freud and
Spengler of four American writers, O'Neill, Dos Passos, W olfe, and Faulkner.
Very justly, as it seems to me, he chose Faulkner as the contem porary writer
who, along with Ernest Hemingway, best illustrates the p ow er and impor-
tance of ideas in literature. Trilling is thoroughly im por
a w a r e t h a t h i s c h o ic e w ill
r mo,eT
's'euot
" Society
f.(Und^ >f Psychoanalysis sic,mono freud ^ ln flu en ce of th e A ustrian
Oswald Spengler (1H8(M936) author of ru n > ^ nd the G erm ar philosopher of history
KuK<O'Neill (IXW-TOS) a n d T " l l y ' < 1 8 -2 2 ), on ,he playwright
(1S00-193H), and William Faulkner (ls 97_ , ^ 2 " hn Dos P assos (1 8 9 6 -1 9 7 0 ), Thom as Wolfe
R e a d in g on I,
-iterary Criticism
255
erhaps perverse, "because," ns he writes, "Hemingway
king andlis te d on their indifference to the conscious Intellectual
^ ^ llcnCr have âve acquired the reputation of achieving their cf-
$ > of aOSr
K ur *'in
wh UtV
a hZi neet ethe
h Xn i gleast
e0
l n
a ctepossible
s P.''?ssi
b |
p connection with any sort of inM-
* , L or eeven
fcctsPy........ v e n w ith in telligence." n w "h any son f in(|>|.
^ J Trilling sh o w s not on ly acute discernment h .
in electing to d eal w ith th e h a rd cases with th a" admirable hon-
; arlv and easily m ak e th e ca se for the im portance of i d " " " !8 Wh do not
E m i n e n t and the h on esty, b u t I w o n d er w hether th u 1 aPPlaud the
does not in d icate th at Trilling is really m " ! ! , Wh ,e discuss<,n in
* C r i t i c s " than p erh ap s h e is aw are. F or M C' Ser to lhe ^-called
' : l o " to -o n e relation b etw een the T * 'T
S S * W(W f " e m b t d - ba d- no, S aim h a T 'W

S iz a b le ideas o f a fo rce o r w e ig h t are 'u sed ' in the w ork," or "new ideas of
^certain force and w e ig h t a re p ro d u ce d ' by the w ork." He praises rather the
act that we feel th at H e m in g w a y and Faulkner are "intensely at work upon
he recalcitrant stu ff o f life. T h e last p o in t is m ade the matter of real impor-
m ce. Whereas D o s P a sso s, O 'N e ill, and Wolfe make us "feel that they feel
hat they h av e sa id th e la s t w o r d ," "w e seldom have the sense that
Hemingway and F a u lk n er] . . . h av e m isrepresented to themselves the na-
ure and the d ifficulty o f the m atter they w ork on ."
Trilling has ch o sen to state the situation in terms of the writer's activity
Faulkner is inten sely a t w o rk , etc.). But this judgm ent is plainly an inference
rom the q u ality o f F a u lk n e r 's n o v e ls Trilling has not simply heard
-aulkner say th a t h e h a s h ad to stru g g le w ith his work. (I take it Mr.
iemingway's d e c la ra tio n a b o u t the effo rt he put into the last novel im-
jresses Trilling as little as it im presses the rest of us.)
Suppose, then, th at w e tried to state Mr. Trilling's point, not in terms of
he effort of the artist, b u t in term s o f the structure of the work * * ^ h o u ^
*e not get som ething v ery lik e the term s use y t e orma i ironjes and
cription in term s o f "te n s io n s ," o f sym bolic eve op describe in terms
heir resolution? In sh ort, is n o t the form alist critic trying
,1the dynamic form o f the w o rk itself how the recalcitrancy of
Sacknowledged and d ealt w ith ? to acc0mmodate my
Trilling's d efinition o f "id e a s " ake 1 in which he repudiates the
>osition to his. I have alread y quoted a p t> "used" in the work,
>otion that one has to sh ow h o w recogniza e 1 wrjte: "All that we
,r ew ideas are " p ro d u ced " by the work. He g ^ ^ important
to do is account for a certain aesthe 1 different from the proce* y
>a.rt thieved by a m ental process w hich is no ^ be judged by someso
^hkh discursive ideas are conceived, and w have to look far to 1
by which an idea is ju d g ed ." have been at pamMo
^ " f o r m a l" enough to object to this. ideas or 'pmduce
upon is that literature d oes not sim ply e x c w p
Critic01
.. ...lings >" l ll*'r,,ry that the writer is a .
, nc claims
1 kll(,wUltti's- //"w ad er ought to use h.s, in p ro c^
, IVilliug >/ mind and his di(tcursive ideas are c o n c e i ^
in nsl idi"l- > V process by wh,t opn ideas, but it does not / '
- 10. dith-ent fmn .f ideas. j * n with the "recalcitrant stuff/,
Literatim.' is -<'< ,ultly. that involvement. <
wnt ideas pa'lv a . )b is to deal w commont upon the critic's sr*
life." The literaly < ,^ .r invites a el * that one could takPP?'
^ r n i ^ S U i.< ^dm er T sm
the ad
m i, c ,in
u " gos of,Faulkner
. ' n,uvvcur.
o^
cific job. As 1b . put consider
m ost b rillian t c r itic s th a t w e have, som
ant critics that we have,
" u'
ren - V:
lx 'ru" ....... , th,."m the worK u.
i mt .eL wrong-headed,
...mnc-headed, and de
and dun
'
,, m any w*,ra*-'*
some
trab ly s o . W h a t is tru e of Faulkner
including many writers
n of the past
s on y less true of m any a n o * * critics p ro p o se n e w u s e s m e of ,h em ex.
i " ,ure has many "uses - a n d fo rm u s e s to w h ic h literatu re can be
citing and sPe/ / / / , r Rowing what a given work "means." That knowl-
basic.
Sm.cn.re, Sign and F la, in lh Discou

of the Human Sciences
by Ja cq u es D errid a
We need to interpret interpretations more than to interpret things.
Montaigne
Perhaps som ething has o ccu rred in th e h is to r y o f th e c o n c e p t o f structure

that could be called an 'e v e n t/ if this lo a d e d w o r d d id n o t e n ta il a meaning
w hich it is precisely the function o f s tru c tu ra l o r s tr u c tu r a lis t thought to
reduce or to suspect. Let us sp eak o f a n 'e v e n t / n e v e r th e le s s , a n d let us use
quotation m arks to serve as a p re ca u tio n . W h a t w o u ld th is e v e n t b e then? Its
exterior form w ould be th at of a ru p tu re a n d a re d o u b lin g .
It w o u ld be e a s y e n o u g h to s h o w t h a t t h e c o n c e p t o f s tru c tu re and
ev en the w o rd 's tru c tu re ' itself a re a s o ld a s th e e p is te m e 1 th a t is to say as
o ld as W e ste rn s c ie n c e a n d W e s te r n p h i l o s o p h y a n d t h a t th e ir roots
th ru st d eep in to the soil of o r d in a ry la n g u a g e , in to w h o s e d e e p e s t recesses
th e epistem e p lu n g es in o r d e r to g a th e r th e m u p a n d to m a k e th em p a r t" '
itself in a m e ta p h o rica l d is p la c e m e n t. N e v e r t h e l e s s , u p to th e event which
A term reined by Michel Foucault (see below, pp. 2 8 1 -9 3 ) to refer to 'the total set of relative
s c ie n c e /, Z * 7 ' ^ discursive that g ive rise to epistem ological figures,
sciences, and possibly formalized system s of know ledge'.
Readinir
gs on Literary Critici
ish to mark out and define,* structu
IUT0 -
osm u i. 257
1 vVU, IL -alth ou gh it has always been at or rather the
___ 3 ^ v/tcn at work, has . mebeen
structu j ---------------- struneutralized
ctu ra lly of
reduced, and always
or bv a origin.
" dce a ii
fixed process of giving it a center or of r e f . '
point of presence, acu origin The i l funrt;--.......
c ~ v.
orient, balance, and organize the tunction r of referrr H,"'e
3n unorganized structurebut-ih tructure0ne Cemr vvas n I8 !t to a
principle of the structure w o u ld ^ 6 a11 to Wake m>f in fact con n'y to
structure. By orienting and orl a! mit " h a tJe V ? ? ,ha' *e
center of a structure permits (he p" ln? coherent 'he * 4 om8
And even today the notion of a s . f ts elementT f ,he system
unthinkable itself. ucture lacking anvmS,de the
Nevertheless ,he center a,so doses Qff ^ P -s e n t^
makes p o ssib le. A s c e n te r , i t U S off th e pla v ,.,u - , opens up and
tents, e le m en ts, o r te r m s is n o lone! P m at w hic/tlJ^K T c"3 up
of the tra n s f o r m a tio n o f e l e m e m f L T f le ' A * % * * * " f con-
closed w ithin a s tr u c tu r e ) is fo rb id d e n A n may of c u r s e bfsT ? U,aHon
remained in terd icted (a n d I a m usine?t,A east this Pemruta! u res en
Wn tbnueht that the ^ 8his word deliberately) Th *** a'Ways
-----------v x v m / t i a i
ways been thought: th at the center, w hich is by definition unique, constituted

------^ j vacuaiinun umqu
hat very thing w ith in a stru ctu re w h ich w hile governing the structure, es-
re, es-
[ 3 oc Qtructurality. T h is is w h y classical thought concerning structure
__ to w ------- jiauuuic could
say that the cen ter is, parad oxically, within the structure and outside it. The
center is at the ce n1te r ocf the
_____ i . i . u ~ 1 1
. --------------
totality, j- -
and vet <;inro fu 4 *
. ~
to the totality (is n o t p a rt o f the totality), the totality t o cen ^ T w h
The center is n o t the center. T h e con cep t o f centered structure-although it
represents co h eren ce itse lf, th e co n d itio n o f th e epistem e as philosophy or
scienceis contradictorily coherent. A nd as always, coherence in contradiction
expresses the force o f a d esire.1The concept of centered structure is in fact the
concept o f a p la y b ased on a fund am ental ground, a play constituted on the
basis of a fu n d am ental im m o bility and a reassuring certitude, which itself is
beyond the reach o f play. A nd on the basis of this certitude anxiety can be
mastered, for an x iety is in v ariab ly the result of a certain mode of being im
plicated in the g am e, o f b ein g cau g h t by the game, of being as it were at stake
m the game from the ou tset. A nd again on the basis of what we call the cen
ter (and w hich, b eca u se it can be either inside or outside, can also indiffer
ently be called th e o rig in o r en d , arche or telos), repetitions, substitutions,
fransformations, and p erm u ta tio n s are alw ays taken from a history of mean-
lr*g [sens] th a t is, in a w o rd , a h isto ry w hose origin may always be
reawakened o r w h o se en d m ay alw ays be anticipated in the form of pres-
ence- This is w hy one p erh ap s could say that the movement of any archaeo
8y, like that o f an y esch ato lo g y , is an accom plice of this reduction of e
structurality of stru ctu re and alw ays attem pts to conceive of structure on
asis of a fujj p resence w h ich is beyond play- , f tue
If this is so, the entire h isto ry o f the concept o f structure, b et J h P
^ of Which w e are sp eak in g, m u st be thought o f as a senes of substitute.
2s KouliossonUf'^y determinations of the center.
iink.-d chu t" <" c c nter receives different
of center for renter, in ,n,ej fashion, ^ ^ hi8lory of the West, is
Successively, d * |ory of m etnp hy*"- >g> 9 m atrix if you will
forms or mimes. 1 he j u s and nieto y elliptical in order to
the history of t 'ese ' ^ m e and for. ^ "d e te r m in a tio n of Being
Pardon me denums rM ^h
t e m e - .* * * ,hat aU the
c-ome nore qo.cUy .o n y P w(,rd, couhi b*. 8 have alw ays desi
f n n d ^ ^ < " *
na.ed an invariable p r e s e n c e ^ . . transcendentality, consciousness,
existence, substance, sublet), a h tl.u a,
God, man, and so forth. disruption I alluded to at the beginning of
The event I called a rupture, the dis P when the stru ctu rality of
this paper, presumably would nave repeated, and this is why I
structure had to begin to be thoug , verv sense of the word. Henceforth,
said that this disruption was repetition in somehow governed the desire
it became necessary to think both thei a ^ ^ ess of signification
for a center in the constitution of struc ' ( .1 1 r rpnf.rai
which orders the displacements and substitutions for this la o central
p re se n ce -b u t a central presence w h ich h as n e v e r b e e n its e lf h a s alw ays
already been exiled from itself into its ow n su b stitu te. T h e su b stitu te does
not substitute itself for anything w hich h as so m e h o w e x is te d b efo re it.
Henceforth, it was necessary to begin thinking that there w a s n o center, that
the center could not be thought in the form of a p resen t-b ein g , th at the center
had no natural site, that it was not a fixed locus b u t a fu n ctio n , a so rt of nonlo
cus in which an infinite number of sign-substitutions cam e in to play. This was
the moment when language invaded the universal p ro b lem a tic, the m om ent
when, in the absence of a center or origin, e v e ry th in g b e c a m e d iscou rse
provided we can agree on this w ord that is to say, a sy ste m in w h ich the
central signified, the original or transcendental sig n ified , is n e v er absolutely
present outside a system of differences. The a b se n ce o f th e tran scen d en tal
signihed extends the domain and the play of sig n ificatio n infinitely.
, 8 ll* r e " d k w does this decentering, th is th in k in g th e stru ctu rality of
or an arn C r m ;,raWT , somewhat naive to ref
der designate this occu rren ce. It is n o d o u b t n art of the
totality of an era, our ow n but still it w i , , a o u M P art 0 1 we
itself and begun to work. Nevertheless f Z " w T J
'n am es,' as indications only, and to recall thn W1* h e d to c h o o s e several
th is occu rren ce has kept m ost closely to im h ? ,n w h o se discourse
doubtless would have to cite the Nietzchm * T ^ radlcal formulation, we
tique of the concepts of Being and tmth ^0^ f m e ta Ph y sics' lhe cri
cepts of play, interpretation and si^ ' , . Whlch were substituted the con-
Freudian critique of self-presence that i ^ n " wlthout present truth); the
th e su b ject, o f self-id en tity and o f s e lf Dw Cr' tul ue o f consciousness, of
m ore radically, the H eideggerean destruction f Y s e lf-p o sse ssio n ; and,
tion of m etap hysics, o f ontotheologY
âdiiv
S on L iterary Criticism
f Being as presence.2 But ail these destructi 259

rminatin b ^ os fare
. m d e t*A all then* a
trapped inw
th e relation
a kind
eenof circle. ~
the
x r-M m a kind of c ihist
r c i r S - Ctive dis'
*niquen - the destruction
off
the history
he rt
of -
on bc,w een me
* ^ VICISis
Ux*iC$ ^ * * i1 1 history ofc,rck'meta-
_____ m siory metaphysics. There is no sense
^ . anu ^ rTg'concepts of metaphysics in order to shake metaphysics.
vîthut _no syntax and no lexiconwhich is foreign to this
We vewe <*n p
langU nounce not a single destructive proposition which has
rl Dinto the form, the logic, and the implicit postulations

l^ Jad
rprecisely Y
.T u g g e S*ed t0 o!. m
!?Lks
e n tisato
g ocontest.o To take ône l example
- c efrom
p t man-
V * ? #-
^ a^m sence as s with
shaken o the
n .... ^
........
i yP
L cthat
M *there
ic* 0 is
P n o tran scen d en tal o r privileged s i J ^ i a " stratein 'his
J i n or play o f sig n ifica tio n h en cefo rth has no limft f d and thal the do-
fre concept and w ord 's ig n ' itself w hich is precisely'whe(mUS' re,ect even
for the signification 'sig n ; h a s alw ays been understood ^ n / d e tr w
its meaning, as sign -of, a sig m fier referring to a signified p c ' m,'ned- -
te signified. If o n e e ra se s the radical d i f f e ^ b e '^ n
signified, it is the w ord 's ig n ifie r ' itself which must be a b a n d o n e es ameta-
physical concept. W h en L ev i Strau ss says in the preface to The Raw and the
Cooked that he has 'so u g h t to transcend the opposition between the senfibt
and the intelligible b y o p eratin g from the outset at the level of signs/11the ne
cessity, force, and leg itim a cy o f his act cannot make us forget that the con
cept of the sign can n o t in itself su rp ass this opposition between the sensible3
and the intelligible. T h e co n cep t o f the sign, in each of its aspects, has been
determined by this o p p o sitio n throu ghou t the totality of its history. It has
lived only on this o p p o sitio n and its system . But we cannot do without the
concept of the sign, fo r w e can n o t give up this metaphysical complicity with
out also giving up th e critiq u e w e are directing against this complicity, or
without the risk o f era sin g d ifferen ce in the self-identity of a signified reduc
ing its signifier into itse lf or, am ou n tin g to the same thing, simply expelling
its signifier outside itself. F o r there are two heterogenous ways of erasing the
difference betw een the sig n ifie r and the signified: one, the classic way, con
sists in red u cing o r d e r iv in g th e sign ifier, that is to say, ultimately in
submitting the sign to th o u g h t; the other, the one we are using ere agains
the first one, con sists in p u ttin g in to question the system in w the
ceding reduction fu n ctio n ed : first and forem ost, the opposii 10 e(j uction
sensible and the intelligible. F or the paradox is that
the sign needed the o p p o sitio n it w as reducing. e . the sjgn can be
atic with the reduction. A n d w h a t w e are saying e r e * vsics, in particular
^tended to all the co n cep ts and all the sentences o bei ng caught in
t0 'he discourse o n 'stru ctu re '. B u t there are several ways of S
3^_P; 207 n.s, above.

'Sensibl
e Cleaning 'perceptible through the senses
l it. rary CrltU-inm less empirical, more or
2oO Ko.uN'tfHon
. r less n u iv c, Hujre o r h a t tQ th e fo r m a l.
.h i , circle. They to th e f ,r ^ " h U p l o i n th e m u ltip lic ity of
less system atic, mom < jjf f e r e o c e s w h J n th o s e w h o e la b o r a te
i/.u io n ot th is c n v l.. H > ^ d is a g re e m e n t ^ w o r k e d w ith in th e in -
e le m en ts or
p articu lar
is w h at al-
could do the same for Heidegger himself, for h

ers. And today no exercise is more_wide p w h en w e tu rn to w h a t are
What is the relevance o f t e m p erh ap s o c c u p ie s a privileged
called the
n* UckA fVio 'human sciences
srumces . e thnology co u ld h a v e been bom
place ethnology. In fact one can assume co m e ab ou t: at the
as a science only at the moment when a de & v. c .
moment when European c u ltu re -a n d , in con seq u en ce, th e h isto ry of m eta
physics and of its concepts had been dislocated, d riv e n fro m t s locu s, and
forced to stop considering itself as the culture of reference. This m o m en t is not
first and foremost a moment of philosophical or scientific d isco u rse. It is also a
moment which is political, economic, technical, and so forth. O n e can say with
total security that there is nothing fortuitous about the fact th at the critique of
ethnocentrism the very condition for ethnology sh o u ld b e system atically
and historically contemporaneous with the destruction of the h istory of meta
physics. Both belong to one and the same era. N ow , eth n o lo g y like any sci
ence comes about within the elem ent of d isco u rse. A n d it is prim arily a
European science employing traditional concepts, h o w e v e r m u ch it m ay strug
gle against them. Consequently, whether he w ants to or n o t an d this does not
depend on a decision on his part the ethnologist accep ts into his discourse the
premises of ethnocentrism at the very m om ent w hen h e d en ou n ces them. This
necessity ,s irreducible; it is not a historical contingency. W e o u gh t to consider
all its implications very carefully. But if no one can escap e this necessiW and if
no>one is therefore responsible for eivine in it u * v , f ^ U
a ,.. giving m to it, h o w ev er little he m ay do so,
this does not m ean that all the w avs of giving in if ^ c i .
T h e quality and fecundity of a d is b u r s e f eqUal Pertmence;
rigor w ith w hich this relation to the historv o f easu red b y the criHca!
concepts is thought. Here it is a question both [ e ta Pb y slcs an d to inherited
guage of the social sciences and a critical resno " u t 1' ? relation to the lan-
is a question of explicitly and sy ste m a tic a l' P Slblllty o f the discourse itself. It
a discourse w h ich bo rro w s from a h o C " 8 *h e p r o b le m o f R e
construction of that heritage itself A nroW thefresou rces necessary for the de-
lf w e consider, as an e x a m p l e ^ C w T ^ om and Strate* * . ,
only because of the privilege accorded t o , m fi C lau d e L<5vi-Strauss, it is not
7 F b accorded to ethnology am on g the social sciences,
ead'HKs
even because the thought of n Uttrary Crit.
^ rarv theoretical situation. It is above a H ^ WeiKhs h ^ **
glared in the work of Levi-Strauss and l a n the
g r a t e d there, and precisely, in a ^ ^ U a e a ^ " n choke
order to follow this m veS " 8 fie ^

choose as one guiding thread among oth ' he ,L't of u ,h
d culture. Despite all its rejuvenations a* !!'e PP<>sih(, ! 'hS' rauss, |( Us
congenital to philosophy. I, is even o] "d <iisgui b<*vn na, s
Sophists.4 Since the statem ent of the ODJ Plato- It is at) pP0sibon is
htf *>een rekyed t JUS by means of a ^ hole V Physislnomos 7 h*S ld as the
'nature' to law, to education, to art, to t e c h ^ ^ chain w f f * * * ' U
bitrary, to history, to society, to the mind and Ut also to Kber fP? OSes
bis researches, and from his first book (T hp^f0 n Now' from thp he ar'
on, Levi-Strauss simultaneously has e x p e n d ?m* ? tary Structurls o f T ^ l (
this opposition and the impossibility of accepting T ? * * o f H
Structures, he begms from this axiom or definite " 8,k ln ,he Element^
and spontaneous, and not dependent on any parti, hat ,which * m iv e jt
terminate norm, belongs to nature. Inversely th 7 . CU tureoronanyde-
system of norms regulating society and therefore is I w depends upon a
one social structure to another, belongs to culture Th h 6 f VaryinX from
of the traditional type. But in the very first pages of t h are
Levi-Strauss, who has begun by giving credence to thefe concerns
,ers what he calls a scandal, that is to say, something which no longer Wer'
ates the n atu re/cu ltu re opposition he has accepted, something which
simultaneously seems to require the predicates of nature and of culture This
scandal is the incest prohibition. The incest prohibition is universal; in this
sense one could call it natural. But it is also a prohibition, a system of norms
and interdicts; in this sense one could call it cultural:
Let us suppose then that everything universal in man relates to the natural
order, and is characterized by spontaneity, and that everything subject to a norm
is cultural and is both relative and particular. We are then confronted with a fact,
or rather, a group of facts, which, in the light of previous definitions, are not far
removed from a scandal: we refer to that complex group of beliefs, customs,
conditions and institutions described succinctly as the prohibition of incest,
which presents, without the slightest ambiguity, and inseparably com ines, t e
hvo characteristics in which we recognize the conflicting features o wo
ally exclusive orders. It constitutes a rule, but a rule which, alone among
^ ia l rules, possesses at the same time a universal character.
Obviously there is no scandal except within a system '

Cred'ts the difference betw een nature and culture, y j .es himself at
Wllh the/acfum of the incest prohibition, Levi-Strauss thus plac
,PhiloPhers and teachers active in Greece in the fifth century BC.

recedes th e m -rr e b a y"os
M h ical co n cep tu alizatio n , w hich is
, be said that the opposition, is d e sig n e d to leav e in ,he
^ 1 5 .e very thing that m akes th is c n ce p ,u a iization
^^This exam p^rtw ^cur^rilyêxam ined^s only one a m o n g m any others,

imb exdinpie, ^ . i,mtniaee b ears w ith in itself the necpo.
but nevertheless it already shows that language oe< e necfs-
sity of its own critique. Now this critique may b e u nd ertaken along tw o paths,
in two 'manners.' Once tire limit of the nature/culture op p osi ion m akes itself
felt, one might want to question system atically and rig orou sly the history of
these concepts. This is a first action. Such a system atic and histo ric questioning
would be neither a philological nor a philosophical action in the classic sense
of these words. To concern oneself with the founding co n cep ts o f the entire
history of philosophy, to deconstituteP them, them, is not to
is not to uunueiuiiNt
n d ertak e them e w ork of
ui the
u
philologist or of the classic historian of of philosophy.
philosophy. D D esp
esp ite
ite appearances,
ap p earances it U is
- l - i -i .. d--------gt
pmbabty the most coring
daring way
way Gf
of m aking the beginnings
making b eg in n in g s o f aa step
step outside of
philosophy. The step 'outside philosophy
philosophy' is m uch m ore d ifficu ltt to concei conceive
than is generally imagined Vw by those who think they m ad adee it lo n g aago w ith cu,
alier ease, and who in general are swallowed up in m etap h y sics m the entire
body of discourse which they claim to have disengaged from it.
The other choice (which I believe co rresp o n d s m o re c lo se ly to Tevi-
QfrîiQc'Q mAnnpi^ in order in avoid the nossiblv steriliz in g effects of the firs
one, consists in conserving all these old con cep ts w ith in th e d o m ain of em
pirical discovery while here and there denouncing th eir lim its, treating them
as tools which can still be used. N o longer is any tru th v a lu e attributed to
them: there is a readiness to abandon them , if necessary, sh o u ld other instru
m ents appear more useful. In the m ean tim e, th e ir re la tiv e e ffic a cy is ex
ploited, and they are employed to destroy the old m a ch in e ry to w h ich they
belong and of which they them selves are pieces. T h is is h o w the language of
the social sciences criticizes itself. Levi-Strauss th in k s th a t in th is w ay he can
separate method from truth, the instrum ents of the m eth o d and the objective
significations envisaged by it. One could alm ost say th at th is is the primary
affirm ation of Levi-Strauss; in any event, the first w o rd s o f the Elementary
Structures are: 'Above all, it is beginning to em erg e th at th is distinction be
tw een nature and society ("n a tu re " and "c u ltu r e " se e m p re fe ra b le to us
today), w hile of no acceptable historical sig n ifican ce, d o es con tain a logic#
fully justifying its use by m odern sociology as a m eth o d o lo g ical tool.'iv
\ **
VJ
Readings on Literary Criticifn, JM

ctrass will always remain faithful to this d..M
^ Vl*n instrument something whose truth value he rrv nti(,n: to P"?-
< # >'*he w m K
c? m in r in ,
/culture opposition. More than thirteen years If . 'W a l ,he
nJtute^, s Mind faithfully echoes the text I h J * l llmen,ry
S P *"1 between nature and culture to which I it ' |ust The
< 'Z e now seems to be of p r i m ^ " I * * *
3t Tthis methodological value is not affected by its 'ontolmt- ,rJ!P rtance/
And sht be said, if this notion were not suspecthereV 'H Mcal nonva,ue
V g U to reabsorb particular h u m a n i S ^ X n e
S & - opens the way for others which . . . are
tural sciences: the reintegration of culture in nature and finally of |de
thin the whole of its physico-chemical conditions ,v V
** on the other hand still in The Savage Mind, he presents as what he calls
triedtge what might be called the discourse of this method. The bricoleur
says Levi-Strauss, is som eone w ho uses 'the means at hand/ that is, the
instruments he finds at his disposition around him, those which are already
there, which had not been especially conceived with an eye to the operation
for which they are to be used and to which one tries by trial and error to
adapt them, not hesitating to change them whenever it appears necessary, or
to try several of them at once, even if their form and their origin are het
erogenous and so forth. There is therefore a critique of language in the
form of bricolage, and it has even been said that bricolage is critical lan
guage itself. I am thinking in particular of the article of G. Genette,
Structuralisme et critique litteraire', published in homage to Levi-Strauss in
a special issue of L'Arc (no. 2 6 , 1 9 6 5 ) , where it is stated that the analysis of
bricolage could "be applied almost word for word' to criticism, and especially
to 'literary criticism'.
If one calls bricolage the necessity of borrowing one's concepts from the
text of a heritage which is more or less coherent or ruined, it must be said
that every discourse is bricoleur. The engineer, whom Levi-Strauss opposes to
the bricoleur, should be the one to construct the totality of his language, syn
tax, and lexicon. In this sense the engineer is a myth. A subject who suppos
edly would be the absolute origin of his own discourse and supposedly
would construct it 'out of nothing', 'out of whole cloth', would be the creator
of the verb, the verb itself. The notion of the engineer who supposedly
breaks with all forms of bricolage is therefore a theological idea; and.since
Levi-Strauss tells us elsew here that bricolage is mythopoetic, the odds ar
the engineer is a myth produced by the bricoleur. As soon < *
believe in such an engineer and in a discourse whic rea s ^
ceived historical discourse, and as soon as we admit tha eve y
^0urse is bound by a certain bricolage and that the engineer naced ancj
/e *lso species of bricoleurs, then the very idea of brtcolag
inference in which it took on its meaning brea s ow
k
which might g u id e u s in w h a t is
lht? second thread
This brings us to tnt ^ gn intellectual activity but
being contrived h * * f,rlV(,/rt<^ not on Y M ind 'Like bricolage
l^vi-Strauss dtstr Gne reads m . b rifliant unforeseen re-
also as a m ythopnâl Y{ reflection ca ^ often been 'draw n to
on the technical plane, my Conver!*ly , attentu
suits on the ^ f bricolage/'' doe9 not sim p ly con sist in
. L . lWv in his most recent in a 9truc,ura,1

appears I wd * ? fsay
ould f
^ , C n d of mythological * * * * * w hich he accord s to h is ow n dis-
almost from the o u t s e t - h ia * . -mythologicals . It ,s h re that h ,s dls-
course on myths, to what he ca Is h itself. A nd thisi moment,
course on the myth reflects on itse. ^ ^ (he lan g u ag es w htch share
this critical period, is evidently o Levi-Strauss say o f his 'm ytho-
the field of the human sciences. m vthopoetical v irtu e of bricolage.
logicals'? 1. is here that ' " ^ g inThis critical search for a new ste
in effect, what appears m andonment of all referen ce to a center, to a
tus of discourse is e s origin or to an absolute archia [begin-
ningt'The3 theme6 of thfsdecentering could be fo llo w ed th ro u g h o u t the
'Overture' to his last book, The Raw and the Cooked. I sh all sim p ly rem ark on a
few key points.
1. From the very start, Levi-Strauss recogn izes th a t th e B o ro ro myth
which he employs in the book as the 'reference m y th d o es n o t m erit this
name and this treatment. The name is specious and the u se o f the m yth im
proper. This myth deserves no more than any other its referen tia l privilege:
'In fact, the Bororo myth, which I shall refer to fro m n o w o n as the key
myth, is, as I shall try to show, sim ply a tra n sfo rm a tio n , to a greater or
lesser extent, of other myths originating either in th e sa m e so ciety or in
neighboring or remote societies. I could, therefore, h a v e leg itim a tely taken
as my starting point any one representative m yth of the grou p . From this
point of view, the key myth is in terestin g n o t b e c a u s e it is ty p ica l, but
rather because of its irregular position w ithin the group/vii
soumeÎfThe mv?hUnityr abso' Ute Source o f ,h e m y th . T h e fo cu s or the
u n a c t u a liz a b le .L d T o n S m f r n Z V 311? V,irtUa' ities which are elusive'
structure, configuration, or relationship The f " ' E v e ry tb in S b e S ins with
ture that myth itself is, cannot itself h f,' ^ d ' scou rse o n the acentric struc-
center. It must avoid the violence that / ! / an ab solu te su b ject or an absolute
describes an acentric structure if it is n o tT *8 n cent eri nS a language which
ment of myth. Therefore it is necessarv . (s h ortch an S e the form and move-
discourse, to renounce the episteme whi k ^ iT 8.0 sclentific or philosophical
absolute requirem ent that w e go bark ^ absolutely requires, w hich is the
founding basis, to the principle and * tb e so u rc e, to th e center, to the
course, structural discourse on mum S n l n P P s itio n to epistem ic dis-
Y s m ythological d iscou rse must itself
Readings on Literary Critictem 26S
rphic. It must have the form of *k ,

author*0 . MV'S in The Rm"</ thec*<
P 7 Lt4Vi-5trauss says .................. ,r ,,' n i J ::
^ , uotealc)ngand n'nuirk.tblc passage;
to t5l
$-e -Mdv of myths raises a methodological problem in h ,
^ * t according to the Cartesian principle of breaking Ca,nn<,t be r-
many parts as may be necessary for finding the s o lu ttn T difnCU,,y
^ to methodological analysis, no hidden unity to be erasnJ . ? ,s no rtal
f i n process has been completed. Themes can b e L ifu n ^Ce^ ebreakin8-
J hen you * ink yu have disentangled and separated them^ ^
fadNtag <oge.her again in respond l o V o p ^ T ,ha*
pities. Consequently the unity of the myth is n e w UnexP 'd
nndprojective and cannot reflect a state or a particular m f than tendential
6 a phenomenon of the imagination, resulting from (he attemptlt tatm)" h' "
and its function is to endow the myth with svntheHr
y f Pand* ln
llc rorm toteiprevent
rP ret*-
uv**' - tion into a confusion of opposites. The science of myths might
its disinte^ termej 'anaclastic', if we take this old term in the broader etymo-
titerefore wîc^ includes the study of both reflected rays and broken rays,
logical sens osophicai refiecti0n, which aims to go back to its own source,
BUt A c t io n s we are dealing with here concern rays whose only source is
the ret e j Ancj in seeking to im itate the spontaneous movement of
hyPf logical thought, this essay, which is also both too brief and too long,
hd to conform to the requirem ents of that thought and to respect its
hhSt t o It follows that this book on myths is itself a kind of myth.
This statement is repeated a little farther on: 'As the myths themselves are
based on secondary codes (the primary codes being those that provide the sub
stance of language), the present work is put forward as a tentative draft of a
tertiary code, which is intended to ensure the reciprocal translatability of sev
eral myths. This is why it would not be wrong to consider this book itself as a
myth: it is, as it were, the myth of mythology.'1* The absence of a center is here
the absence of a subject and the absence of an author: "Thus the myth and the
musical work are like conductors of an orchestra, whose audience becomes the
silent performers. If it is now asked where the real center of the work is to be
found, th e answer is that this is impossible to determine. Music and mythol
ogyb ring man face to face with potential objects of which only the shadows
are a c tu a liz e d Myths are anonymous.,x The musical model chosen by Levi-
Strauss for the composition of his book is apparently justified by this absence
of any real fixed center of the mythical or mythological discourse.
Thus it is at this point that ethnographic bricolage deliberately assumes
' mythopoetic function. But by the same token, this function makes the
.o-ophioal or epistemological requirement of a center appear as mytho-
^ ' that is to say, as a historical illusion,
done eVertheless' even if one yields to the necessity of what Levi-Strauss has
discouT6 0annOt ignore its risks- If the mythological is mythomorphic, are all
ical re * * 0n myths equivalent? Shall we have to abandon any epistemolog-
lrement which permits us to distinguish between several qualities of
2t>6 Heading* on UWu" y s,n
evitable qu estion . It can n ot be an-
discourse on the myth? A c' a*sic' ^ ' does not answ er it for as long as
swerv'dand 1 believe that v r* u;. hiU)Sopheme or the theorem , on
the problem of the relations h wee mVth o p o em , o n the other, h as not
the one hand, and the my theme or ' )bU;m. For lack of explicitly pos-
been posed explicitly, which is no 8n\ transform in g the alleged trans-
ing this problem, we condemn ourse fau j t w ith in th e p h ilo sop h ical
gression of philosophy
realm. Empiricism wouldinto an unno
b e the genus of w h ,cbh tthese ^fau^lts w ou ld always Vs
b e the species. Transphilosoph.cal concepts w jo d em on strate
philosophical naivetes. M any examp ^ for$ , W h at I w an t to empha-
risk: the concepts of sign, istory, ru philosophy does not co n sist in turning
size is simply that the passage beyond philo p y crtnu ;7;noVtaîtr\
the page of philosophy (which usually am ounts to phrlosophiz badly), but
in continuing to read philosophers in a certain way. T h e risk I am speaking of ts
alw ays assum ed by Levi-Strauss, and it is the v ery p rice o is en eavor.
I have said that empiricism is the m atrix of all faults m en acin g a discourse
which continues, as with Levi-Strauss in particular, to consider itself scientific.
If we wanted to pose the problem of em piricism and bvicolage in depth, we
would probably end up very quickly with a num ber of absolutely contradic
tory propositions concerning the status of discourse in stru ctu ral ethnology.
O n the one hand, structuralism justifiably claims to b e the critique of empiri
cism. But at the same time there is not a single bo o k or stu d y b y Levi-Strauss
w hich is not proposed as an empirical essay w hich can alw ays b e completed
or invalidated by new information. The structural schem ata are alw ays pro
posed as hypotheses resulting from a finite quantity of inform ation and which
are subjected to the proof of experience. N u m erou s tex ts co u ld b e used to
demonstrate this double postulation. Let us turn once again to the 'Overture'
of The Raw and the Cooked, where it seems clear that if this postulation is dou
ble, it is because it is a question here of a language on language:
If cities reproach me with not having carried out an exhaustive inventory of

South American myths before analyzing them, they are making a grave mistake
about the nature and function of these documents. The total body of myth be
long. ng to a given community is comparable to its speech. Unless the population
dies out physically or morally, this totality is never complete. You might as well
criticize a linguist for compiling the grammar of a language without having com-
plete records of the words pronounced since the language came into being, and
wdhout knowing what will be said in it during the future part of its existence.
Experience proves, that a linguist can work out the grammar of a given language
from a remarkably small number of sentences.... And even a partial grammar or
an outline grammar is a precious acquisition when we are dealing with un
known languages. Syntax does not become evident only after a (theoretically
limitless) series of events has been recorded and examined because it is itself the
body of rules governing their production. What 1have tried to give is an outline
of the syntax of South American mythology. Should fresh data come to hand.
i, * .....* ...... ' " ' . " H ........<mo 2#>7
will be used to cluvk or modify f|u, flt
*** so that some am abandoned and n>p|flJ ' n,l,,<ul" r o f tVrf<lf
Lj" '. i i hvl constrained to accept iho arhiflilr^ Vn,w - B ||( , KM,n'"*
*!
......... , ...........%umil ary demand for a total mythological
" ' i, I
jeoi
'cl>nJ,y
dshl"Vuvn shown, such a requirement has no meaning."
T,<ulin'i,m ' therefore, is soi,.|;,

,w/w 7 *. T his is n o d o u b t d u e In sometimes7 as,,, , ,
o * '* # ,h c it' " N a t i o n . A n ",' f" ct - ! ^ are two
m
U ndways
, of con-
lernunalions coexist im p lic it ly i , '"'Serf rt' re tw, two de-
h.ju d g ed im p o s s ib le in t h e C| L ir 7 ' ' Str<"> ^ 's d l ' " ' B Hhdi/ati
T
K
j|ldeaVUI ' ,A ~ ,*'w a Wllicn It ran n I / U r v i ,
L --------------------------
^ is h>o much, m ore than one can say But mm. . ever mah*r.
^ u n e d in another w ay: no longer " " *
Ijtu d e as relegation to the em pirical, but from the stand,!,! , ; T ' P' of
of p l^ K totalization no longer has any meaning, it 1 n h t ' T
S n d c n e ss of a field can n o t b e covered by a finite ^ n c e t a *
course, but because the natu re o f the f ie ld - th a t is, language and a finite
language excludes totalization. This field is in effect that of play that is to
say, a field of infinite su b stitu tion s only because it is finite, that is to sav
because instead o f b eing too large, there is something missing from it- a
center which arrests and grounds the play of substitutions. One could say
rigorously using that w ord w hose scandalous signification is always oblit
erated in French that this m ovem ent of play, permitted by the lack or ab
sence of a center or origin, is the m ovem ent of supplementarity. One cannot
determine the center and exhaust totalization because the sign which replaces
the center, which supplem ents it, taking the center's place in its absencethis
sign is added, occurs as a surplus, as a supplement.xn The movement of sig
nification adds so m eth in g , w hich results in the fact that there is always
more, but this addition is a floating one because it comes to perform a vicar
ious function, to su pp lem ent a lack on the part of the signified. Although
Levi-Strauss in his use o f the word 'supplem entary' never emphasizes, as I
do here, the two directions o f m eaning which are so strangely compounded
within it, it is not by chance that he uses this word twice in his Introduction
to the Work of M arcel M a u ss', at one point where he is speaking of the
'overabundance of signifier, in relation to the signifieds to which this over
abundance can refer':
In his endeavor to understand the world, man therefore always has at hj* _
P0^! a surplus of signification (which he shares out amongst t lings ac_
(he laws of symbolic thought-w hich is the task of
study). This distribution of a supplementary allowance am /
; b Permissible to put it that w a y -is absolutely necessary n o r * rd-a ^
r j ]Yflole (he available signifier and the signified It *(* ( ,f svt-
^honship f complementarity which is the very con,I,I,on of tl um
kI*c thought.x,u
(It could no doubt be domonstr.i
cation is the origin of the ratio it:
after Ltfvi-Strauss has mentione
tude of all finite thought':
pure state, and therefore capable o f b eco m in g ch a rg e d w ith a n y so rt o f sym-

bolic content w hatever? In the sy stem o f sy m b o ls c o n stitu te d b y all cosm olo
gies, m a m w ould sim ply be a zero sy m b olic v alu e, th at is to say, a sig n m arking
the necessity of a sym bolic content su pplem en tary [m y italics] to th a t w ith which
the signified is already loaded, b u t w h ich can tak e on a n y v a lu e requ ired , pro
vided only that this value still rem ains p art o f the a v a ila b le reserv e and is not,
as phonologists put it, a group-term .
Levi-Strauss adds the note:

'Linguists have already been led to form ulate hypotheses of this type.
For example: "A zero phonem e is opposed to all the o th er phonem es in
French in that it entails no differential characters and no constant phonetic
value. On the contrary, the proper function of the zero phonem e is to be op
posed to phoneme absence." (R. Jakobson and J. Lutz, 'N otes on the French
Phonemic Pattern', Word 5, no. 2 [August 1949]:155). Sim ilarly, if we schema
tize the conception I am proposing here, it could alm ost be said that the func
tion of notions like mana is to be opposed to the absence of signification,
without entailing by itself any particular signification.'xiv
The overabundance of the signifier, its supplementary character, is thus the
result of a finitude, that is to say, the result of a lack w hich must be
supplemented.
It can now be understood w hy the co n cep t o f p lay is im portant in
Levi-Strauss. Flis references to all sorts of gam es, notably to roulette, are
very frequent, especially in his C onversations in Race and History, and
,x v
in The Savage Mind. Further, the reference to play is alw ays caught up in
tension.
Tension w ith history, first of all. This is a classical problem , objections
to w hich are now well worn. I shall sim ply indicate w hat seems to me the
form ality of the problem : by reducing history, L evi-Strauss has treated as it
d eserves a concept which has alw ays been in com plicity w ith a teleological
and eschatological metaphysics, in other words, paradoxically, in complicity
K* on t it
u,<#r*iry
. p h i lo s o p h y o f p r o s e ,H O t w l i / . i . ,, ............
ith 4 T he th e m a tic o f h is to ric ity nhi W a 1>HU, ,
^ i v ' , . 1 in p h i l o s o p h y , In is l w y 8 I ,,.,!" ," / 1' " ...... n i |
>is p r e s e n c e . Wi th o r w i t h o u t .... 11 l ir e t| h *
thl'^h 't ofhistoria, if history is always th <>f et,isl*'W j J , <>f cU sj<vt|

< h0f ru.h or .he development 7 ^ "l
Ji;;;,h e appropriation of truth in p * " *
S l t H i g e in c o n sc o u sn e ss-o f-se lf. H istory ha8 " f 8," f-P rcn ce " ^ 'H
movement o f a resu m p t.o n o f history, as a d ' ^ bw " c o n i " a
,h But if it is leg itim a te to su sp ect this conr 1 tour between J d as
f i t is ed u ced w ith o u t an e x p licit statem ent ofP(hfhist,,r>'' 'here i s " ^
L here, of falling b a ck in to an ahistoricism o 1 l Probleni 1 am ind.cm
% , into a d eterm ined m o m e n t o f the history of n 'ype- ,hat is to
Bcebraic form ality o f the p rob lem as I see it Mo Sucb is w
0f tivi-Strauss it m u st be recognized that the re sn e T r Wy' in the work
^ internal o rig in ality o f th e stru ctu re, com pels a S'ruc' urality, fo,
and history. For exam p le, the app earance of a new s t a r t , n < me
system, always co m es a b o u t and this is the very m n T ' f 3n ori8inal
tural s p e c if ic it y -b y a ru p tu re w ith its past, its origin a " , ? ^ 8 Struc'
Therefore one can d escrib e w h at is peculiar to the structural Cause'
only by not taking in to acco u n t, in the very moment of this d e S o n T
past conditions: by o m ittin g to p o sit the problem of the transition f r Z o n e
structure to another, by p u ttin g history betw een brackets In this 'struc
turalist' moment, the co n cep ts o f chance and discontinuity are indispens
able. And Levi-Strauss d oes in fact often appeal to them, for example as
concerns that stru ctu re o f stru ctu res, language, of which he says in the
'Introduction to the W ork o f M arcel M auss' that it 'could only have been
born in one fell sw o o p ':
Whatever m ay h a v e b e e n th e m o m e n t and the circum stances of its appear

ance on the sca le o f a n im a l life , la n g u a g e could only have been born in one
fell swoop. T h in g s c o u ld n o t h a v e se t a b o u t acqu irin g signification progres
sively. F ollo w in g a tr a n s fo r m a tio n th e stu d y o f w hich is not the concern of
the social scien ces, b u t r a th e r o f b io lo g y and psychology, a transition came
about from a sta g e w h e re n o th in g h a d a m ean in g to another where every
thing possessed it.xvii
s standpoint does not prevent Levi-Strauss from recognizing the slow

s' the process of m aturing, the continuous toil of factual transformations,
;r,ry (for exam ple, Race History). But, in accordance with a gesture
Was also Rousseau's and H usserl's, he must 'set aside all t w
foment when he w ishes to recapture the specificity of a structure. Like
R eadings on Literary Criticism rf ^ ^ ^ ^
Rousseau, he m us, always c o n ^ e of r f , n a tu re , a n atu re, inter-

model of catastrophe an ove ^ aside of n ature.
o p tio n of the natural sequence, a settmi, (here * a ls o th e tension
p Besides the tension between play sru tion of presence. The presence
between play and presence. W * subs,i,u tive reference m scnbed ut a
of an element is always a ' an r f a ch ain. P lay is alw ay s play of ab-
system of differences and the moyeme ra d iCally, p la y m u st be con-
sence and presence, but if it is to b e and absence. Being m ust be con-
ceived of before the alternative ot of the possibility of play and not
ceived as presence or absence on than a ny other, has brought to
the other way around. If Levi-btra ' tition of play, one no less perceives in
light the play of repetition and t P of n o staig ia for orig in s, an ethic
his work a sort of ethic of prese , Qf presen ce an d self-presence in
of archaic and natural innocence, P e w h ich he often presents as
speech an ethic, nostalgia, an when he m oves toward the archaic
the motivation of the et no ogic P . . ^ is e y e s . T h e se te x ts are w ell
societies which are exem plary socicti y
lennwn xv'**
Turned towards the lost or impossible presence o f the absent origin, this
structuralist thematic of broken im m ediacy is th e re fo re th e saddened,
negative,nostalgic, guilty, Rousseauistic side of the th in k in g o f play whose
other side would be the Nietzschean affirm ation, that is the jo yo u s affirmation
of the play of the world and of the innocence of becom ing, the affirm ation of
a world of signs without fault, without truth, and w ith out orig in w hich is of
fered to an active interpretation. This affirm ation than determ ines the noncenter
otherwise than as loss o f the center. And it plays w ithout security. For there is a
sure play: that which is limited to the su b stitu tio n of g ive n and existing , pres
ent, pieces. In absolute chance, affirm ation also su rren d ers itself to genetic
indetermination, to the seminal adventure of the trace.
There are thus two interpretations of interpretation, of structure, of sign,
of play. The one seeks to decipher, dreams of deciphering a truth or an origin
which escapes play and the order of the sign, and w h ich liv es the necessity
of interpretation as an exile. The other, w hich is no longer turned toward th(
origin, affirms play and tries to pass beyond m an and hu m anism , the nam<
of man being the name of that being who, throughout the history of meta
physics or of ontotheology in other words, throughout h is entire history
has dreamed of full presence, the reassuring foundation, the origin and th<
end of play. The second interpretation of interpretation, to w hich Nietzsch
pointed the way, does not seek in ethnography, as L evi-Strauss does, the 'in
spuation of a new humanism' (again citing the 'Introduction to the Work c
Marcel Mauss ).
more *han enough indications today to suggest we might peI

w Z c \ i r 6 fmteripretations of interpretation w hich are absolute!
econcilable even if we live them simultaneously and reconcile them in a
^ u r e e c o n o m y - t o g e t h e r s h a re .. , K M .,r.,rv r ,
fm atictohxw . the social '< fiB|d * c " *o ,
For m y p a r t, a lt h o u g h th
o
se11 *v<! ca ll ,
,nj accentuate their difference tVv in tem ' n * Jch a
Brv * % ,h v r e is a n y q u o s h f j ' f ' ^ C m " 0 " * >u , , .
eare ma rei<>n(lot us sa l ibtl!,*knnledlte
# ,h e ca te g o ry o / c h o ice se e m * P r v iio lh first * , d"<>t b e
because w e mustfirst t r y to c o n ^ ^ n r i y ^ * o ft*
jiffentncc o f thts ir r e d u c ib le d irr ,V e o f t h y tn v a l; a n ,, , f h ,s fo ricitv i
/ s t i l l call i t h i s t o r i c a l , w h o se ! Knce- Here , .
are only catch in g a g lim p e ^ ? a l a * * " * an d
glance tow ard th e o p e ra tio n s o f t o e m P h y th 8esl
ward those w h o, in a s o c ie ty f r o m ^ ' ^ - i n l ^ Wo'd s , U u hbor " e
eyes away w h en fa c e d b y t h e a s ' V hicf* I d o n o ,b u t a ,s w ith l " 1!'- wHh a
and w hich can d o s o , a s is n e c e s s /* U nna,>iable L l* d u d e m y /* f an to -
under th e sp ecies o f th e n o nSnp 7 w h ^ nev em r ' - - u t is
e P, in
^ f-
o c h L^^ their
tying form o f m o n stro s ity ? C l e s ' i th e f0 rm , b ,rth is in th e o T r*8 k s e lf
Notes
'The reference, in a restricted sense, is to the Freudian theory of neurotic symptoms
nd of dream interpretation in which a given symbol is understood contradictorily
ansboth the desire to fulfill an impulse and the desire to suppress the impulse. In a
as
general sense the reference is to Derrida's thesis that logic and coherence themselves
canonly be understood contradictorily, since they presuppose the suppression of
differance, 'writing' in the sense of the general economy. Cf. 'La pharmacie de
Platon,' in La dissemination, pp. 125-6, where Derrida uses the Freudian model of
dreaminterpretation in order to clarify the contractions embedded in philosophical
coherence. [T ran slator's Note]
The Raw and the Cooked, trans. John and Doreen Wightman (New York: Harper &
Row, 1969), p. 14. [Translation somewhat modified.]
* The Elementary Structures o f Kinship, trans. James Bell, John von Sturmer, and
Rodney Needham (Boston: Beacon Press, 1969), p. 8.
"'Ibid., p. 3. Mind (London: George Weidenfeld & Nicolson; Chicago: The University
vThe Savage
ofChicago Press, 1966), p. 247.
> d .,p .l7 .
The Raw and the Cooked, p. 2.
- kid., pp. 5 -6 .
^ d v p .U .
pp. 17-18.
^dv pp. 7-8.
differ' and 'to defer .
^rrida s term punningly unites the senses of to
l Horary C riticism
272 Hcaain^sont- thing which is missing, or to
iaim*nt to HUpp'y Virriaa's deconstruction of
- TW a>*We * " 5f , ! - ! < * " v ln'Thc Violence of the Letter. From
,,,ply wmethmttaa , r 1' am,lyi of U-vi-Strauss begun in
n ation al ^'" ' rnwhlch .he contradictions of
U vi-S.rusa to * 1 clarify the uni apparatuses of linguistics
this essay in order turtner ^ modern cone*j
traditional logic \ \o r>s Note] M j Mauss, Sociologie et
and1 lilt
the social --- Mattel Mauss , in Manx
***'
'Introduction M i ^ xlix.
1950), p- xli*
anthropologie (Paris: . c trauss (Paris: Plon, 1961).
xtv Ibid., pp- x lix -l. avec d a u d e l * * * * * * * V
w George Charbonmer, q publications, 1958).
Raceand de parcel Mauss, P - * ^ ^ (London: Hutchinson,
toTristcs tropics, bans. John Russc
1961). (Translator's Note]
Heroic Ethnocentrism
The Idea of Universality in Literature
by Charles Larson*
In the fall of 1962, when I began teaching English literatu re to h ig h school

students in Nigeria, I encountered a num ber of stu m b lin g b lo ck s, w hich I
had in no way an ticip ated -all of them cultural, exp eriential. This w as not a
matter of science or technology and their various b y -p ro d u cts as I h ad antic
ipated ('What is a flush toilet?') but, rather, m atters related to w h at I have
learned to call culturally restricted materials. It w as en o u g h , to b e sure, just
for my African students to read through a 450-page V ictorian n o v el (required
reading in those days for the British-adm inistered sch ool certificate exami
nations); and, as 1 later learned, in the low er levels at least, stu d en ts were ac
customed to taking several months or even the greater p a rt of a y ear to read
through and discuss the plot line of a single novel. L en g th alone w as enough
to get them, since English was their second lan gu age an d the problem of vo
cabulary was especially troublesome. But once the p ro b lem s of language,
vocabulary and verbosity had been overcom e, read in g th ro u g h the words
became a less difficult process than u n d erstan d in g w h a t the w o rd s them
selves related the 'experience of literature' as w e are w o n t to say.
f i e d f r ^ r What l es um ean " to k iss" ?' T h a t w a s a m u ch more dif
ficult question to answer than the usual ones relatin g to th e p lo t or the char-
acters of the novel a real shock u , ? P , ,T
had a rather naive boy in my class So I h Wa* bJ Sht to m y attention that I
y I b ru s h e d th e q u e s tio n off u n til it was
*From 'Heroic Ethnocentrism* THp
(Summer), 1973. niversality in Literature' The American Scholar 42 (3)
Rt'a,li"KnU
" y Critic
, . number of times ami I slowly b
r f ^ d n real idca Whn,; t n,ennt <......... .
Sits h me because most of my students w ' T ls Un n' y M,-
5 in their early tw e n tie s -" !,jT ?
M* occasion about their girl friends. It w L^T COUr*-'. h.wd7i * tr
w l^ L v s were married, although by school mg,!'.!," " ' " " red that V Z " )
" " S ui be. Nevertheless that question and oil er" r M'y Wt'm not s
*
p-xst ____in _r\i\ HonKf
part, Knmior%...
no doubt, b ecam e , ~ rs of a lil^f P*
"Z'Z CmwJ-Why did H ardy's'Sh'! Wad'hg Thma m 'Ure klpt
/* were kissed (or more likely, when th , h ractt?rs get f. Har<iy's yar
S 'e f the European-educated African t e a c h ^ " kissed)? ZhZ wha>
mady to - t u m .o that sam e q u e S T SwWhy *w 2 if* *
m that Africans, traditionally at leau a ' 1 Was mre than a,VVays
thought was 'natural' in one society is not' natural ataU b eam
^tural. Not all peoples kiss. Or, stated more ' but Earned thf - *
have learned to kiss. (W hen I later attended American n0t a11 PeP ^ '
I understand w hy the audience often went i n t o C ^ ^ A hk^
tic scenes in the film s.) nto hysterics at the roman-
How was one to read a Thom as Hardy novel with n u
^ without ever having been kissed? How was I t n l i th Se frustrated
this to my African students? Or, to limit my experienrpV S methin8 like
matter concerning the novel's form which also perplexed mv T a technical
about those long passages of description for which Hardv ^tudeP ^ what
MyAfrican students cou ld n't understand what page after paee ? ebrated?
of the countryside had to do w ith the plot of the novel. Whaf they h ^ S v e n
me, as I later learned, w as another clue to the differing ways in which culture
shapes our interpretations o f literature. It was not until I seriously began
studying the African novel itself, however, that I could put all of those pieces
together; just as the questions about those kisses revealed something about
myAfrican students' cultural background, so too, did their concern about the
descriptive passages o f H ardy's book. The fact that descriptive passages were
virtually nonexistent in A frican fiction initially seemed particularly puzzling
tome, since the first generation of African Anglophone novelists, at least, had
been brought up alm ost entirely on the Victorian novel. Whereas other ele
ments of the Victorian novel had found their way into the African novel, de
scription had not. Could it be that this omission in the African novel revealed
something basically different betw een African and Western attitudes toward
^ture, toward one's environm ent?
Kissing and description, attitudes toward love and nature are t eseai
? * so different for .h e A frican? Is the African way of life less ophrtoMd
h
kan our own? O r is the b e lie f that these supposedly un,v<j^ hen
*uld be the same as o u ts the naive one? Is this what we
r talk about 'universality' in literature if someone oe considend
H in our literature the sam e w ay that we do, then he to be
274 R eadin gs on Literary C riticism
Inferior? IVrhnps tlw term ilwlf h o w ev er^

^ , S X t r : u r own. And these reactions, in turn, ^
their interpretations of literature. m c d u mia.ieoa
For the most part, the term 'universal' has been when it
has been applied to non-Western literature, because it h as so often been used
in a way that ignores the multiplicity of cultural experiences. Usually, when
we try to force the concept of universality on som eone w h o is not Western, 1
~ n nr own culture should t>6 the stan d ard of
S ' . S h i.h ih ^ m , L d i5 5
differentat least for the African. n h ir rv.m nc

In his preface to Tsao-Hsueh-Chin's eighteenth-century C hinese novel,
Dream o f the Red Chamber, Mark Van D oren says, T h e g reatest love stones
have no time or place.' I frankly doubt this, in spite of o th er W estern literary
critics, who have also said that the m ost com m on them e m literature is love.
(Leslie Fiedler, in his Collected Essays, for instance.) A fter read ing dozens and
dozens of contemporary African novels, I can in no w ay accep t Van Doren's
or Fiedler's assertions. There is at least one w hole section of the w orld where
the love story is virtually nonexistent. I can thin k of n o contem porary
African novel in which the central plot or them e can be called a 'love story,'
no African novel in which the plot line progresses b ecau se of the hero's at
tem pt to acquire a mate, no African novel in w h ich sed u ctio n is the major
goal, no African novel in which the fate of the lovers b eco m es the most sig
nificant element in the story. N o African novel w ork s this w ay because love
as a theme in a Western literary sense is simply m issing. R om antic love, se
duction, sex these are not the subjects of A frican fiction. In fact, in most
contem porary African novels w om en play m inor p arts; the stories are con
cerned for the m ost part w ith a m asculine w orld . T h ere m ay be marriage,
b rid e price and an occasional tele a tete b u t th at is n o t th e concern of the
novel, it is always something else. There are no grap hic descriptions of erotic
love, there are no kisses, no holding hands. There is, in sh ort, no love story as
w e have com e to think of it in W estern fiction. N o t even the unrequited lover
pining away. African fiction simply is not m ade of su ch stuff___
W estern rom ance is only one them e that m ay p u zzle the African reader.
H e m ay have trouble understanding the lack of con cern about death in some
W estern novels, too. Or, w hat is m ore likely, the ^Vestern reader may totally
m iss the significance of a death in a piece of A frican fiction that he is reading.
A . A lvarez, in his fine book, The Savage God, says that 'perhaps half the liter
ature of the w orld is about death.' Yet our society has w orked so hard to neu
tralize the shock of death that it is quite possible for us to miss the emotional
o v e rto n e s of a piece of A frican w ritin g in w h ich d eath occurs. Sembene
O u sm an e's celebrated short story, 'Black Girl' ('L a noire de . . .') is one such
,le. The story concerns a young , Crt,l( rn
275
esa" f- to Antibes when the French ^'Icxy gir| n
F
fto rance. O u s.nnne begins his story h h18 Worked d C>iH" w wh
'"
trn5,h , illustrating her excitem en t an by pr' ,i<'cti,, f,,r in SenoJ ,i
W o n d e r f u l e x p erien ce: the c h , ^ ^ ^ 7 ^ "
5 ,s shortly become a nightmare. Overw i.Ve France u c bay*
African5- called a nigger by the four children S ' f*M in g iHUa"a'.
A nths Diouana commits suicide bv s h h I he French fw , her fc,,(>vv
S e m reader may think that O u ^ t e : ; ' ! " " Wr,is
Melodramatic account of racial p r e j u d i c e - ^ s|mPly a n u ^ T *
MfV about modem slavery, and what t h ^ 1 ls' ln Part But u her
S U * f * . life,
deaths m the ocean m o rd er to escape s la y e r y T ^ ^ M V,erb ard >
takes her own M e to find release from her own ens ayed ^ W rld' D oana
only a part o f it, fo r in co m m u tin g s u ic id e -o n e of ,gd atioa But bis is
many African s o c .e t ie s - s h e has only temporarily re e ! a T 8* * ' ,ab in
trapped her ancestors, broken the cycle of life and if T hereelf- She has
has ended the fam ily lin eage. She has, in short comma, V " nly chiId- she
nation, and the A frican read ing the conclusion to Ousman l T ble abomi-
tied by what she has done. It is, therefore, the relieinc f 8torF ls horri'
ancestral w orship th at the W estern reader will p r L b l y cMmpTetiy"
The hero c o n c e p t - t h e belief in the individual who is different from his

fellowmen is [also] alm ost totally alien to African life; and, as an extension of
this, the hero in contem porary African fiction is for the most part non-existent.
The hero is alm ost non existent in contemporary Western literature too, but his
descendant, the anti-hero, the isolated figure, is a force to be reckoned with.
This is not true o f A frican fiction, however. Rather, it is the group-felt experi
ence that is all im portant: w hat happens to the village, the clan, the tribe___
One begins to w ond er if tw o peoples as widely different as Africans and
westerners will ever be able to read each other's literature and fully understand
it. This is not, how ever, the question I started out to ask. Literature is not so lim
iting that only one interpretation is possible. We cannot all be both African and
westerner, black and C aucasian. W hat is important, it seems to me, is that when
we read a piece o f non-W estern literature we realize that the a
make of it m ay be w idely different from what the artist inten e , ^ êr_
H that we should not expect people who are not o our, The timehas
ltage to respond in the sam e w ay that we do to our ow 'unjVersal.' What
cme when we should avoid the use of the p e p ra j literature are cul-
* e really mean w hen w e talk about universa exPe r tern tradition.
ral responses that have been shaped by our own essay are African in
Although m ost of the exam ples I h a ve use erience of other non
> I would h azard a final c o n j e c t u r e that t h P ^ also suppc
Wes*rn literatures (C hinese and Japanese, for exa P
Criteria of Negro Art
So m any persons have asked fo r the complete text o f the
Bois at the Chicago Conference o f the N a tion al Associa î
Colored People that we are publishing the address here.
chosen. Such people are thinking something like this. H ow is 1 at an orga

nization like this, a group of radicals trying to b rin g n ew th in gs into the
w orld, a fighting organization which has com e up out of the b lood and dust
of battle, struggling for the right of black men to be ordinary h u m an beings-
how is it that an organization of this kind can turn aside to talk about Art?
After all, w hat have we who are slaves and black to do w ith A rt? '
O r perhaps there are others w ho feel a certain relief an d are saying,
After all it is rather satisfactory after all this talk about righ ts an d fighting to
sit and dream of something which leaves a nice taste in the m o u th ."
L et me tell you that neither of these groups is righ t. T h e thing w e are
talking about tonight is part of the great fight w e are carry in g on and it rep
resents a forward and an upw ard look a pushing on w ard . You and I have
been breasting hills; we have been climbing u p w ard ; there h as been progress
and w e can see it day by day looking back along blood-filled paths. But as
y ou go through the valleys and over the foothills, so lon g as y o u are climb-
tbe direction, north, south, east or w est, is of less im portance. But
w h en gradually the vista widens and you begin to see the w orld at your feet
s o d the far horizon, then it is time to know m ore precisely w hither you are
going and w hat you really want.
W h a t do we w ant? W h at is the thing w e are after? A s it w as phrased
la st n ig h t it h ad a certain tru th . We w a n t to be A m e ric a n s , full-fledged
A m e rica n s, w ith all the rights of other A m erican citizen s. B ut is that all?
D o w e w a n t sim ply to be A m ericans? O nce in a w h ile th rou g h all of us
th ere flashes som e clairvoyan ce, som e clear id ea, of w h a t A m erica really
is. W e w h o are d ark can see A m erica in a w a y th at w h ite Americans can
n o t. A n d seein g our cou n try thus, are w e satisfied w ith its present goals
an d id eals? 1
1The Crisis; the address was delivered in 1926.

R eadings on Liter
ary CriticiSm
277
hich school where I studied we learned mo^t r c
In thS by heart. In after life once it was my privilege , " ' S "U d y >><
!A*e yiw
t as quiet. You could glimpse thedeer ward * * the lake-
t s S < yvou could hear the soft ripple of romance on ?h" dm n8 in unbro-
Kb^lThVcadence of that poetry of my youth. I fell asleerTf Around
% 5 o f the Scottish border. A new day broke a n d . c * en
J.n They poured upon the little pleasure bat * " * Were l<,ud
U * 'X o l o n e 'i d e and drooping c i/a rs 2 ?
hSuths; W1h s h a r f l ! h e i r c o n v e r s a t i o n w ith th e w o rld . T h e y all
; get everywhere first They pushed other people out of the way. They
a!all sorts of incoherent noises and gestures so that the quiet home folk
Â th e visitors from other lands silently and half-wonderingty gave way
Z them. They struck a note not evil but wrong. They carried, perhaps, a
qp of strength and accomplishment, but their hearts had no conception of
beauty which pervaded this holy place.
lf you tonight suddenly should become full-fledged Americans; if your
r faded, or the color line here in Chicago was miraculously forgotten;
C ose, too, you became at the same time rich and powerful:what is it
SU^ ou would want? W hat would you immediately seek? Would you buy
^ ost powerful of motor cars and outrace Cook County?3 Would you buy
^ most elaborate estate on the North Shore? Would you be a Rotarian or a
r!e T a what-not of the very last degree?4 Would you wear the most strik-
U clothes give the richest dinners and buy the longest press notices?
mg Even as you visualize such ideals you know in your hearts that these are
. fhp thincs you really w ant. You realize this sooner than the average
Ta^come1 us n ot^ n ly^ a"certai:n ^ ^ ^ te^ o ^ h e'tew d ^ an ^ ^ m ljo^ i^ b '^
s r r K i t '. r - a i - i s a s
work, the inevitable suffering that always co , men know, where
ing, all th a t-b u t, nevertheless, lived m a life. It is
men create, where they realize themse V^ rgelves and for all America,
that sort of a world we w ant to create . it? j remember tonight four
After all, who shall describe Beau y g in stone, set in light and
beautiful things: The Cathedral at ColoSI3e' lemn SOng; a village of the
changing shadow, echoing with sunlig
l sand ladies ( .810), by Sir Waller S
Apoem in six cantos about early- 16 th-century nig
V771"1832*' described as
>unty in which Chicago is located. mirations; Freemasons are
Rotary and Lions clubs are national service org ^ l322.
achieving certain degrees. begun in 1248 and consec
Magnificent Gothic cathedral in Cologne, Germany, g
278 Readings on Literary Critici
Veys in West Africa, a little thing f 'room w h ere o n a

and shininB in tire sun; a ^ c u r v e s of the V enus of M ilo /
old and yellowing marble; the b kuth_ utter m elody, h a u n tin g and apPe8'e
phrase of music in the South^ . and eternity, b en eath th e m oon . P al'
ing, suddenly arising out ot n b its possibility is en d less. In norTv^
Such is Beauty. Its variety is * The w o rld is full o f it; and Ve? ? ? al
* -
We black folk may help for we have w ith in us a s a race n ew stirrin g
stirrings of the beginning of a new appreciation of joy, of a n ew desire to cre
ate, of a new will to be; as though in this m orning o g ro u p life w e had awak-
ened from some sleep that at once dim ly m o u rn s th e p a s t an d dreams a
splendid future; and there has come the conviction th at th e Y outh that is her
today, the Negro Youth, is a different kind of Y ou th , b e ca u se in some n ^
way it bears this mighty prophecy on its b reast, w ith a n e w realization
itself, with new determination for all m ankind. *
What has this Beauty to do with the w orld? W h a t h as B eau ty to d
Truth and Goodnesswith the facts of the w o rld a n d th e rie h t art Wltb
men? "Nothing," the artists rush to answer. They m ay be righ t I a m ^ 8 f
humbie disdpie of art and cannot presum e to say. I a m one w h o tel
truth and exposes evil and seeks with Beauty and for B e a u ts c wu the
n 8 HtRT ^ atTSOmehOW' s o m e w h e r e e t e r n a l a n d p e r f e c t B e a u t y s i t s a h ^
an d Right I ca n c o n c e iv e , b u t h e r e a n d n o w a n d i n t h e w o rld 1 TrUth
th ey are fo r m e u n s e p a ra te d a n d i n s e p a r a b l e . d w h l c h 1 w ork
a p e o p le .T h e m h a s c o m e ^ r u t-a ^ ^ C s T o m e 5^ WC Ur own Past as

we are going to honor tonight8_ a realiz^Ho 1 P e c ,ally through the man
years we have been ashamed, for w hir i f f that P a st' of w hich for long
nothing could come out of that nagf u- u"6 b av e a P lo g iz e d . We thoueht
we wanted to hand to ^ e m e m b ^ ; S
b e p ro u d o f t " w rea lity ' a n d ir >a h a l f s h a m t h l s s a m e p a s t is taking
d L a n d lie f ^ ^ U m b e r i n g t h t th ^ W * Y W e are b e g ^ 8 t o
w ith y o u m u st hate n ^ ^ M i d d le A g e - I ? ! n a n c e o f t h e w o r l d d id not
y u m u st h a v e it h e r e a n d n o w a n d Y U W a n t r o m a n c e to deal
d m y ou r ow n hands.
torAfriSnVAOdSOn(187S- 1950)/to > loVe <2d c- B-C.E. copy of a 4th c.

1916 fUnde d T e ^ ~ t , W a s ^ A fen^ C P in 1926 a w a rd e d the Sp in ga m Medal
f "egro History. Atncan American educator and historian who in
R^ d in
t-nevv a m a n a n d w om an . Thev had * Literary Critic^
279
' 0 .e and a daughter who was brown; ^ ' ^ " ' ^ Bhterwho
7 , white man; and when her wedding was 2 . Who Was white
< * * * L brown prepared to go and celebrate. But K ? " " da"Khtc-r
0 7 , bIown daughter went into her room and turned n T m " Mid' "No!"
3iidthe ant Greek tragedy swifter than that? d he as a"d died.
C ag ain , here is a little Southern Town and you are in the n, uv
^ Jd e of the square is the office of a colored law yer and P ^ Icustluare-
On n men who do not like colored lawyers A white wn ^ 3 the ther
cean d points to the w h i . ^ ^ ^ ? *
bl^Cdred dollars now and tfl do not get it I am going to s c r e a m fVe
b Have you heard the story of the conquest of German East Africa9 Listen
the untold tale: There were 40,000 black men and 4,000 white men who
* .German. There were 20,000 black men and 12,000 white men who
W d English. There were 10,000 black men and 400 white men who talked
tal h In Africa then where the Mountains of the Moon raised their white
french. ,d heads into the mouth of the tropic sun, where Nile and
and sno ^ ^ reat Lakes swim, these men fought; they struggled on
Congo r i s e antj vaUey, in river, lake and swamp, until in masses they sick-
mountain, ^ died; until the 4,000 white Germans had become mostly
ened, craw c ^ n^ . al) the 12/000 white Englishmen had returned to
bleached none., ^ Frenchmen to Belgium and Heaven; all except a
South Africa, ^ men died; but thousands of black men from East,
mere handful() m Nigeria and the Valley of the Nile, and from the
West and South Afrit*, b and died For fOUr years they fought and
West Indies still strugg c , b hear about it is that England
won and lost German East A r ^
and Belgium conquered Gtrmar Romance is bom and from
Such is the true and st.rr.ng stuff of whw (q remembe th , thl
this stuff come the stirrings of nu n * 8 QWn kind is beckonmg
kind of material is theirs; and tins a
them on. .1 , interpretation of thesenew (he

The
me question comes
question com next as
es next as to
to caDable? We
J P ^ pable? We have
have had
lie ,<T
of this new spirit; O f w hat is t ie co . jar unanimity of ju itcomes
part of both colored and w h ,f * ^ is work must be inferior b e c a u ^ ^ .g
past. Colored people h ave s a ic . b ve said; " I t 1S in^ , realization
from colored p e o p le ." W h ite peop ig coming to bo . storiescome
done by colored p eo p le." But toe ay ^ inferior. Interes i bad stud-
that the work of the black m an is not a J read to a c l a s author. They
to us. A professor in the University o ^ them to gaess . down to
*d literature a passage of p oetry and a ^ Br0wning
guessed a goodly co m p a n y from
Bois
f o u n ts events of World War I.

-Sum-
Readings on Literary Criticism

280
C ou
C o un
n tee
te r C u lle n .10 O
7 r a g a in 1the
.. 1 1 The author w as <- v~ so u th e rn >minarv
sem in ary , Qne
one Q
Tennyson amt went dow n ^ ^ S o u th . T h e stu d en ts
sat
Enfitish erme lo '1 ,, ounfi white wo so m c re sp o n se o u t of th,
the sort which ft 1CCS while he tried W t> p o e ts." T h ey h esitate. H e
with
ith their w o o d e n
........................- ^ ^ Gf your bOU|r '*ren ce D u n b a r"!12
o( yOUr r" !12 j
Finally he said, "Name m - best: Paul L o f the sev e re h a n d i- ,
idfinally, " I 'l l st^ g n io n o f N e g ~ ^ " h h e a n d b l a c k . T h e y a r e
0W
W ith the growing b ,g occurring W b 7 , lu tio n o f th e c o lo r p r o b le m . *
caps, one comforting 8ou, Hore is th e re w b ite ' 3 a n d o t h e r s s h o w s
whispering, "Here Hughes, F ' , W o r k ! A ll w i l l b e w e ll!"
The recognition * * ? ep quiet! Don't c o m p a r e ^ c o n s p .ra c y P crh a p s ,
there is no tea co j (his chorus a m e t o d a y a s u r p r is in g
1T " t mo ^ p t d o u s V . 1 e r e S s f a c t i o n o u t o f th ese
am na ^ hile people who are ge ' " 8 8 to sto p a g ita tio n of the
yoTnger Negro writers b e c a u s e * ^ o j gy o u r fightin g a n d co m p lain -
Negro question. They say, a' ^ ,here A nd m a n y co lo re d p eop le
mg! do the great thing and tbeJ , ice. especially those w h o a re w e a ry of the
are all too eager to follow th s ^ are afraid to fight a n d to w h o m the
eternal Struggle along the co ' publicity are su b tle a n d d ead ly
^ h 2 l Py S t use of'fighhng? W h y n o t sh o w sim p ly w h at
We f r *h e A d v a n c e m e n t of
Colored People comes upon the field, comes w ith its g reat ca ll to a n ew b at
tle, a new fight and new things to fight before the old th in gs are w h o lly w on;
and to say that the Beauty of Truth and Freedom w h ich sh all so m e d ay be
our heritage and the heritage of all civilized m en is n ot in o u r h a n d s y e t and
that we ourselves must not fail to realize.
There is in New York tonight a black w om an m olding clay b y herself in a
little bare room, because there is not a single school of scu lp tu re in N ew York
where she is welcome. Surely there are doors she m igh t b u rst th ro u g h , but
when God makes a sculpture He does not alw ays m ake die p u sh in g sort of
person who beats his way through doors thrust in his face. This girl is working
her hands off to get out of this country so that she can get som e so rt of training.
alive torf ^ a *! ' lf he had b een w h ite h e w o u ld h a v e been
alive today instead of dead of neglect. M any h e lp e d h im w h e n h e asked
^ (1925), used classical models such as

(1792-1822), R o w S g" * S ^ ^ Bysshe SheUey
Masefield (1878-1967). ' Altred' Lord Tennyson (1809-1892), and John
"EngHsh poet, dramatist, and critic (1882-1937)
ôet, fiction writer, and playwright. W nOVellst* LANGSTON HUGHES ( 1902 - 1967),
n African American artist (d. 1917) G m n âuse* (ca. 18841961), novelist and editor.
.u *
was n o . th e k in d o f b o y .h a , a lw a y s ^
2X1
a ke ,,rs sinS- . . 1 w-'s si|np|y
is a c o lo r e d w o m a n in C h ic a g o w l, ,
w ou ld like to s tu d y a t Fontai nb|c a u 3 8fa, m ,. .
tt,aah' uls and a score of leaders of Art have a n ![" UD"ner wh an' S,|e
m n '^ p i i c a t io n blank of this school says- "i a^ muri n sch,x , Wall
& * J $ a * * * to * e school. ^ 1 a white A m l l mus
>erican and l
- ww - o n th e stage; w e c a n b e ju s t a s funny as white Americans wish
? f l l can g _ i a y a l l th e s o r d id p a r ts th at A m erica likes to assign to
^ . v i e c a n P , h in g e ls e th e re is s till sm all place for us.
as t0J> S -b u t f f W g o o n . B u t le t m e s u m u p w ith this: Suppose the only

And s 1 m lg e d s o m e c e n tu r ie s h e n c e w as the Negro painted by white
A wh o * urVlV v e is a n d e s s a y s th ey h a v e written. What would people in
jslegr nS in th e n o A m e ric a n s? N ow turn it around. Suppose you
A ^ U v ^ Z a n d
p u t in it th e k in d o f people you know and like and
a to w rhe a sto ry ^ p o l i s h e d a n d y o u m ight not. And the "might not"
ill far bigger than the m ,g h t." The white p u b l i ^ 11 me "mightnot
W ine Vou th a n the " m ig h t ." T h e w h ite publishers cater^~ - -
would
is stiU & say. It is n o t i n t e r e s t i n g " - ^ whhe filk ^ fcaterinS to white
-ant Uncle Toms, Topsies,16 good "d arkies and clownJ^f'ura% not. They
folk
want
a story with all the earm arks o f truth. A young man savs thJTh * my fflce
t0 write and had h is s to n e s accepted. Then he beean , he Slar,ed out
things he knew b est ab o u t, that is, about his own people h " ' 8 f 0Ul the
story ,o a m agazine w hich said We are sorry, but we c L n o t ^ ' - ^ a
down and revised m y story, changing the color of the character, a
locale and sent it u nd er an assum ed nam e with a change o f a d r W . a ?
was accepted by the sam e m agazine that had refused it, the editor promTstog
to take anything else I m ight send in providing it was good enough " 8
We have, to be sure, a few recognized and successful Negro artists; but
they are not all those fit to survive or even a good minority. They are but the
remnants of that ability and genius am ong us whom the accidents of educa
tion and opportunity have raised on the tidal waves of chance. We black folk
are not altogether p ecu liar in this. A fter all, in the world at large, it is only the
accident, the rem nant, that gets the chance to make the most of itself; but if
this is true of the w hite w orld it is infinitely more true of the colored world,
it is not simply the g reat clear tenor o f Roland Hayes17 that opened the ears
of America. We have had m any voices of all kinds as fine as his and America
was and is as d eaf as sh e w as for years to him. Then a foreign land heard
Bayes and put its im p rin t on him and immediately America with all its imi
btive snobbery w oke up. We approved Hayes because London, Paris an
din approved him and n o t sim ply because he was a great singer.
-1950). Fontainbleau: Fontainebleau, a
^ merlcan conductor and composer (1862
resort.
Uncle
]7Afl' ^Torn
ârriet 3re ^ ncan American characters, a saintly and an impish slave, respec-
African A n ieriJ eecher
s,nS erStow e's novel
o f classical w oUncle
rk s anToms Cabin (1852).
d spirituals (1887-1976), the son o f former slaves.
n literary Criticise b egin this g re a t w o rk of
582 Reading* on , k A m e n ca 4 6Qf th e re a liz a tio n of
, Hounden duty of b l a c ^ c f m e n h a v e u se d b e -
Thus it is ^ b of the p re s c ^ ^ m eth od s g b y ? First of all
the cre a tio n ^ ^ use in this wo ^ ^ arti9ts m ^ a sc ie n tist seeking
Beauty,and havebeen the t . 0 f tru th , itself a s th e h ig h est
u n d e rsta n d -
nith but as one upon ^ 0 ne gre3t VHnessCin all its a s p e c ts o f justice,
handmaid ' , ! ^ ^ G o o d - ^ g ^ n c ton b u t a s th e o n e tru e
!?onor8aI!d g h b - n o O ^ and hum an i" ler^ sUe of T ru th a n d R ig h t n ot

m e th o d o f g a tin g sy P ^ beComes th e ^ Pp h e is b u t h is freed o m is
r r r r i < . < % % * , d 0 g s h im w h e n h e i s
ever b o u n d e d by recognizeân i d e a l ^ o f ^ ^ a U i n g of the

S a r t i h a v 'e for
purists. I stand in utter f " * ! ag an d a for g a in in g th e rig h t o f black
writing has been used always^ or P ^ an y a r , , h a t ls n o t u sed for
o t p i l n d a u fT d o i m when p ropagan d a is co n fin ed to o n e s .d e w htle
the other is Stripped and silent. "W h ite C a r g o " a n d " C o n g o ." 18 In
In New York we have w o p lay s. " ' - J , p C o n g o " fh e fallen
^ a n ^ w W t e d n ^ W h i te C argo" the black w o m a n g o e s d o w n fu rth e r and

further and in "Congo" the white w om an begins w ith d e g r a d a tio n b u t in the
end is one of the angels of the Lord.
You know the current magazine story: A y o u n g w h ite m a n g o e s d o w n to
Central America and the most beautiful co lored w o m a n th e re falls in love
with him. She crawls across the whole isthm us to g et to h im . T h e w h ite m an
says nobly, "N o." He goes back to his w hite sw e e th e a rt in N e w Y o rk .
In such cases, it is not the positive p ro p a g a n d a o f p e o p le w h o b elieve
white blood divine, infallible and holy to w h ich I o b je ct. It is th e d en ial of
a similar right of p ropaganda to those w h o b e lie v e b la c k b lo o d h u m a n ,
lovable and inspired w ith new ideals for th e w o r ld . W h ite a r tis ts th em
selves suffer from this n arrow in g of th eir field . T h e y c r y fo r fre e d o m in
dealiug with N egroes because they h a v e so little fre e d o m in d e a lin g w ith
wh.tes_ CtuBose H eyw ard w rites " P o r g y " 1'* a n d w rite s b e a u tifu lly o f the
do a s fm H a M h w T r rL B u Why d o e s h e d o th is? B e c a u s e h e cannot
h L ouTof ,o w n SThe , W h te P e uPle f C h a rle s to n , o r th e y w o u ld drum
degradation w as to te l" it of c o l o r e d p e t r e l ' h '* . T * ' f P itifu l h u anf
u p e o p le . I s h o u ld n o t b e su rp rise d if
the Primitive (1925), by U-on G otdon3" 1 CheSler DeV>,' d c *VW C argo: W hite C argo: A Play o f
T he 1925 novet by Hcyward < 1 8 8 5 -m o , th a , w as the basis for ^ ^ ^ * ,
Readings on Uterarycnticisrrv 283
..us R y Cohen20 h a d a p o r
% edperm ission to write abont ' ^ d
. . .
^ n s t r o s ih e s h e h a s c r e a t e d :
r'
bu
^
l
- -X#. HJU
you are writing
l b o t " t h e r words, the white public today demand r
& tia l, racial P re'i udSmer>t which dJhh fr m its artists i-f
^ ,nred
as far as colored races are concerned, and it
i ^ ' f pay
will for
dis' rS
no other.
a ?lC\ far aS C'Oy, n d ' the young and slow
h a nd slowly er
ly growing black
' public still
d
\ ^ c6' the other ha ' st equally unfree. We are bound by all sorts of cus-
' Oh 1 pfophets a , Qvvn as second-hand soul clothes of white patrons. We
.jnts lt5T ave come ^ lower our eeyes y e s when
w h en people will talk of it. Our
i st side ----- %.v/ui
tha d of sex aI\ rotition. Our worst side has
has been
been so
so shamelessly
shamelessly em-
em-
Ire ashf^0lds us ^ ^ n y i n g we have
h a v e or
o r ever
CVCi had
lia a worst side.
***' - denying we have or ever had a worst side. In all sorts of In Ml ^
rf|i8'M that we
nays w e > . o uarren-e w y do uour
n g anew
rtisteyoung
h ? ' S K artists have to go fight their
f e a U
p h a f^ e are h em m ed m
; 3; , o fre e d o m . * h av e g 0 fi
The u ltim a te ;u d g e h a s g o t t o b e y o u a n d v o b
| ves u p in t o t h a t w i d e ju d g m e n t , t h a t c a t h o l i c i w ? 8 ' ,0 build your-
going to e n a b le t h e a r t is t t o h a v e h i s w id e s t ch a n ce L f ^ , a Per2 wldch is
ford the T ru th . W h it e f o lk t o d a y c a n n o t. A s it is n o w w e can af-
tWng over t o a w h it e ju ry I f a c o lo r e d m a n w a n ts to p u b & h ^ " t 8
got to g e t a w h it e p u b l i s h e r a n d a w h ite n e w sp a p e r to t k' he *
then y o u a n d I s a y s o . W e m u s t c o m e to th e p la c e w h em th 8 T * ; and
when it a p p e a r s i s r e v ie w e d a n d a c c la im e d b y o u r ow n free 11
, f art
judgm ent A n d w e a r e g o i n g t o h a v e a re a l a n d v alu ab le and e te Z n u lg
ment o n ly a s w e m a k e o u r s e l v e s f r e e o f m in d , p ro u d o f b o d y and ju st o f soul
to allA m
n den.the n d o y o u k n o w w h a t w ill b e s a id ? It is already saying. Just as
soon as tr u e A r t e m e r g e s ; ju s t a s s o o n a s th e b la c k artist appears, someone
touches the r a c e o n t h e s h o u l d e r a n d says, "H e d id that because h e was an
A m erican, n o t b e c a u s e h e w a s a N e g r o ; h e w a s b o m h ere; h e w as trained
here; h e is n o t a N e g r o w h a t i s a N e g r o a n y h o w ? H e is ju st hum an; it is the
kind o f t h in g y o u o u g h t t o e x p e c t . "
I d o n o t d o u b t t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e a r t c o m in g fro m b la ck folk is going to be
ju st a s b e a u t if u l, a n d b e a u t i f u l la r g e l y in th e sa m e w ay s, a s the art that comes
from w h ite f o l k , o r y e l l o w , o r r e d ; b u t th e p o in t to d a y is th at until the art of
the b la c k f o l k c o m p e l s r e c o g n i t i o n t h e y w ill n o t b e rated a s hum an. And
whenJacK
1
th r oroiK
u g h uun|.
a r t t h v.
e y c o m pê l r e c o g n it io n th e n le t th e w orld discover 1 it
----- through art th ey com pel recognition u*^. -
-- - - a s i t i s o ld a n d a s o ld a s new .
will that their art is as new as it is old and as
. rVip 0f
1 - - fJ1a s ^ _ . died One of
had a classm
classm ate
ate once
once who
who did
aiu three
in the
I ' r - i K ,hn found fire and then w em
story o f a folk w ho found f i r e a n d then
them was a r, and* 1
humorist
(1891' 1959)
r f Qhort story writer,
20South Carolina playw right, nove
21Range of disposition.
i Uc%mrv C
2H4 K c m Uu * * * theV had once known and lost;
n eain th e s ta r s 7 lo o m e d th e h eav en s-
S K S S P S 5 S & I w w ? " " " * *" *
S s t e w S - * - .......
Queer Theory
by A nnam arie Jagose
Annamarie Jag ose

all rights reserved
theory- has o u tstripp ed anyone's sense o f w h a t e x a c tly

The appeal o f 'queer
it means.
M ichael Warner
A response to this piece has been received from C . W. Y o u ng .

Once the term 'q u e e r' w as, at b est, sla n g f o r h o m o s e x u a l a t w o rs t a
term of homophobic abuse. In recent years 'q u e e r ' h a s co m e to b e u sed d if
ferently sometimes as an um brella term for a co a litio n o f c u ltu ra lly m arg in al
sexual self-identifications and at other tim es to d escrib e a n a s c e n t th eo retical
model which has developed out of m ore trad itio n al le sb ia n a n d guy stu d ies.
The rapid development and consolidation of lesb ian an d g a y stu d ie s in u n i
versities in the 1990s is paralleled by an increasin g d e p lo y m e n t o f th e term
'queer'. As queer is unaligned w ith any specific id en tity ca teg o ry , it h a s the
potential to be annexed profitably to any n u m ber o f d iscu ssio n s. In th e h is
tory of disciplinary form ations, lesbian and gay stu d ie s is its e lf a relatively
recent construction, and queer theory can b e se en as its la te s t in stitu tio n a l
transformation.
Broadly speaking, queer describes those g estu res or a n a ly tic a l m od els
which dramatise incoherencies in the allegedly stable relation s b etw e en chro
m osom al sex, gender and sexual desire. R esistin g th at m o d e l o f stab ility
which claims heterosexuality as its origin, w hen it is m ore p ro p erly its effect
queer focuses on mismatches betw een sex, gender and d esire. Institutionally,
queer has been associated most prominently w ith lesbian and gay subjects, but
its analytic framework also includes such topics as cross-d ressing, hennaphro-
dihsm gender ambiguity and gender-corrective surgery. W h eth er as transves-
r l Z r e n Z 'Z f r T deC,n stru c " o n . q u e e r lo c a te s a n d e x p lo its th e in-
^he h l n OS? term s w h ich sta b ilise h e te ro se x u a lity . D e m o n stra tin g
th e im p ossibility o f an y n atu ral sexu ality , it c a lls in to q u e s tio n e v e n su ch ap
p aren tly u n p rob lem atic term s as 'm a n ' an d 'w o m a n '
Readings on Uterary Criticism 2m
. n 0 f th is c o n fro n ta tio n a l w ord 'queer' in alto-

n te rv e n n f sCo u r s e s s u g g e s ts th at traditional models have
eC e ^ 1 a d e ^ iC , ra n c e a ls o m ark s a continuity. Queer theory's
< $ i\ te ( ay e t a^ PT > n d e rs a n d sexu alities develops out of a specifi
e r b le s e * * * ' gv n e o f th e post-structuralist figuring of identity
f * of sta GaV rcW r i () a n d u n s ta b le positions. Queer is not always
<
? G K 'uU '? V i e e la b o ra tio n o f or shorthand for 'lesbian and
c a t O r e " 7 a7n a rt'eo
c c e" pS!tu *- - k.....................
o m e q u eer a s 'another - w - ~
h e a t ' 1' -
,h . I . . . * . -h i ," r - A s s j -
,d 0 / historical am n es.a, the stances and demand, 7 J y replites, w .h l
ides identificatory ca te g o rie s w hose poetics i e r 7

,se o f the lesbian and g ay populations with which th pro8res*ive than
Whatever am bivalences structure queer, there is 1 ^ aIigned-
leployment is m aking a substantial impact on lesbiw that its recent
nost as soon as queer established market dominance a ? y Studies-Yet'
d certainly before consolidating itself in any easy v e rm r,!* dlacntical term,
sts are already suggesting that its moment had passed and SOme the'
s may by now, h ave o u tliv e d its political usefulness'.2 D o e s a n Z Z PU*
fund the m om ent it is an intelligible and widely disseminated term? 5 !
lauretis, the th e o ris t often c re d ite d w ith inaugurating the phrase 'queer the-
y \ abandoned it b arely three years later, on the grounds that it had been
<en over by those m ainstream forces and institutions it was coined to resist.
Explaining h e r ch o ice o f term inology in The Practice o f Love: Lesbian
xuality and P erverse D esire ( 1 9 9 4 ), de Lauretis writes: " A s for 'queer theory',
y insistent specification lesbian m ay well be taken as a taking of distance
)m what, since I p rop osed it as a working hypothesis for lesbian and gay
idies in this v ery jo u r n a l (differen ces, 3.2), has very quickly become a con-
ptually vacuous creatu re o f the publishing industry'.3 Distancing herself
)m her earlier ad v o cacy o f queer, de Lauretis now represents it as devoid
the political o r critical acu m en she once thought it promised.
In s o m e q u a r t e r s a n d i n s o m e e n u n c ia t io n s , n o d o u b t, queer oes 1 e
ore than function as sh orth an d fo r t h e unwieldy lesbian and gay, or
>elf as a new solid ification of identity, by kitting out more a ^ anj
herwise u n reco n stru cted sexu al essentialism . erram y most
ten uncritical ad o p tio n h as a t tim es f ^ c l ^ s ? w a retajns, however, a
^ i c o n t and n e ce s sa ry a b o u t the term . gite 0f en g a g em e n t
^ceptually unique p o ten tial as a necessan y un 0^jjjsation of queer,
contestation. A d m itted ly n ot discernible in every mobi
Wb HemUng* on l.lu r.uy narrative of disillusionm ent.
.u.mntive to de Lauretta s au eer w ill continue to
this co'AsntuU's " A >t lry to anticipate exact y ^ contrary, she argues
chaUong" normative structures and dj ^ r^ ay in w hich it u n d erstan d s the
that what makes queer so officaciou 1 therefore ca n n o t b e antici-
effects of its interventions are not s " 8 UU eti8 did w h en initially pro-
pated in advance. Butler understands, as conservativ e effects of tdentity
moting queer over lesbian and gay, them selves as self-evident de-
classifications lie in their ability to n_a., ueer is to avoid sim ply replicating
scriptive categories. She argues t a i T form ations, it m u st be con-
the normative claims of earlier lesbian and gay
ceived as a category in constant for 'd ? n '. .. Dresent, n ev er fully ow n ed ,
M will have to remain that which is, P from a p rior u sag e an d in
but always and only redeployed, twisted, q purposes, and p erh ap s also
the direction of urgent and expanding poll P F ctpctivelv
^
y ield ed in favor of terms that do that political wor hirP of aueer Butlf*
In stressing the partial, flexible and responsive n atu re of queer, Butler
offers a corrective to those naturalised and seemingly se ev gones
of identification that constitute traditional form ations of id en tity politics.
She specifies the w ays in which the logic of identity p olitics w ich is to
gather together similar subjects so that they can ach ieve sh a re d aim s by
mobilising a minority-rights discourse is far from n atu ral or self-evident.
In the sense that Butler outlines the queer project that is, to the extent that
she argues there can't be one queer may be thought of as activating an iden-
tity politics so attuned to the constraining effects of nam ing, of delineating a
foundational category which precedes and underwrites political intervention,
that it may better be understood as promoting a non-identity or even anti
identity politics. If a potentially infinite coalition of sexual identities, prac
tices, discourses and sites might be identified as queer, w hat it betokens is not
so m uch liberal pluralism as a negotiation of the very concept of identity itself.
For queer is, in part, a response to perceived limitations in the liberationist and
i entity-conscious politics of the gay and lesbian fem inist m ovem ents. The
rhetoric of both has been structured predominantly around self-recognition
com m unity and shared identity; inevitably, if inadvertently, both movements
* Z ^ ls . resuUed m êlusions, delegitimation, and a false sense of universal-
Pro,'f ation of <lu * been enabled in part by the knowl-
, t , K f,'C 1 0 uS~ lha produced by and productive of mate-
1 m arb'trar>'' conhngent and ideologically motivated,
o oed o n t Y Ca,ef r es C e l l e d lesbian or gay, queer has devel-
v , ,he beonsing of often unexam ined con strain ts in traditional
e t ty politics. Consequently, queer has been produced largely outside the
registers of recognition, truthfulness and self-identity
Q ueer, then, is an identity category that has no interest in consolidating
o r even stabilising itself. It maintains its critique of identity-focused move
m en ts b y understanding that even the form ation of its own coalitional and
Mi
Rt'a<li" 8 * o , ,
d i a l e d c o n s t i t u e n c i e s m a y w ell a . . ' " '" V C , k
* eh h r in e x c e s s o f those intended * 1,1 e *elu
^ A c k n o w l e d g i n g th e in e v ita b l,. vi|W c (! (>f NU,m' ry J "-Hying ef
its own hegemony, queer is less iX n m ? ^ ,Pn<'ili s having
* * * % in no position to imagine itself outside , J * o f idem)
* * * * identity politics. Instead of defending itself , <>fPn>llem8 ener-
f f ,! operations inevitably attract, queer allows such e r r " 1** Cri,icism
^ L now unimaginablefuture directions. 'The t,C,sms to shaPe
1 vised, dispelled, rendered obsolete to the ex t e n But,er' 'wil1
K ^ n d s which resist the term precisely because yi,eId.8 to the
J en\ t is mobilized'. The mobilisation of queer tin Ip n exclus,ons by
- h f f ounds the conditions of political m p ~ on- T * f
^fects, its resistance to and recovery by the existing networks' a"d
e% ,r U a lp m n , as for Butler, queer K a way of pointing ahead w L u t know-
for certain what to point at. Queer . . . does not designate a class of al-
dv objectified pathologies or perversions', writes Halperin6; "rather, it de-
ribes a horizon of possibility whose precise extent and heterogenous scope
-snnot in principle be delimited in advance . Queer is always an identity under
Cnstruction, a site of permanent becoming: "utopic in its negativity, queer the-
C curves endlessly toward a realization that its realization remains impossi-
0X\ " 7 The extent to which different theorists have emphasised the unknown
k 6 ntial of queer suggests that its most enabling characteristic may well be its
poten looking forward without anticipating the future. Instead of theo-
Pten 3 eef ^ terms of its opposition to identity politics, it is more accurate to
^ J n t it as ceaselessly interrogating both the preconditions of identity and
^ Oueer is not outside the magnetic field of identity. Like some post-
ltS
f r ^ e it turns identity inside out, and displays its supports ex-
c Z e
modem arclu ectur between er and more traditional identity forma-

oskeletally. If the g d is_ that is not because they have nothing
n
tions is sometimes fraugh , authenticity or even political ef-

in common. Rather, lesbian ^ ^ ^ ^ p e n s k m of all such classifications
ficacy of identity categon es an who can say beyond?-the am-
energise each other, offering fnhire
bivalent reassurance of an unimagmable fo tu ^ Melbourne
A m M iarieJagosfi is a S en ior LecWre fromher new book, Queer
University. This piece is extracted with perm.ss,
Theory,University of Melbourne Press 19 ^ ^ ^ Airman s targ
See the discussion on Global Quo
essay On Global Q ueetiDg- . , rp, e ived from C JlU to m S '
A response to this piece has been rece.
References
Teresa (1991) 'Queer T h e o ry : L esbia n and Gay Sexualities', differences:

J Feminist Cultural Studies 3, 2, pp. iii-xviii.
i iinrarv C ritte ^ ^
** R"' *S ... T,m,ardr < * Hagiography, New York:
. . Sflint Foucault*
3- t K t ? W (^ ' , 3w h a ,.s SO Q u e e r H ere ? P h o to g r a p h y a. th e Gay and T:

ii I
M,
S u n Mardi Gras, Eydittf 26, PP- Discursit* Limits o/ 'Sex, New York:
5. Butler, Judith (1993a) Bodies That Matter. On
6 ^ - i d (1993, Sain, Toncauit: Totoards G ay H agiography, N e w Y ork:
7. Eldeman,IL e e ( 1995 )^Queer Theory: (in sta tin g D e sire, CLQ: A Journa, o f UsKan and
Gay Studies 2 , 4, pp. 345-6-
n -
John Keats and Nature, an Ecocritical Inquiry

Interiorising Exteriorities, Exteriorising In ferio rities an d the
Dynamics of Becoming: An Ecocritical In q u iry on Jo h n K eats
by C h arles N giezvih TEK E, P hD
The hush o f natural objects opens quite

To the core: and every secret essen ce there
Reveals the elem ents o f good and fa ir
Making hint see, where Learning hath no light.
This essay attempts a critical study of the poetry of Jo h n K eats (1795-1821)

with regard to ecological consciousness w hich plays a central role in the un
derstanding of the aesthetic, philosophical and eth ical ram ification s of his
theory of the imagination, with the philosophy of b eco m in g largely seen in
his apprehension of poetic and p h ilosop h ical m atu rity as an evolving
process rather than a com pletely accom p lished task. T h is internalisation
and exteriorisation therefore centre on a dialogic stance w h ich 1 term 'eco-
psycho-aesthetics'. Even if K eats's conception of natu re h a s affinities with
at dSCemed m the w orks of R om untics tike W illiam Wordsworth
r llo V , t Ta? k>r Colerid8e (1772-1834) and P ercy Bysshe Shelley
(1792 1822), the intention of this w rite-up is not p rim arily the fullness of
spiritual experience in nature. [\\
W riting to Fanny Brawne in February 1820, K eats said,
If I shou ld d ie, I h av e left no im m o rtal w o rk b eh in d m e - n o t h i n g to m ake my

fn T - n r T u / ^ y m oyy but 1 h ave lo v 'd the principle of b eau ty in all things,
and if 1 h ad had tune I w ould have m ad e m yself rem em b er'd . (Selected letters, 422)
Readings on Literary Criticism
. a a n c e lS tthe self-chosen inscription on K eats's tomb 2S9
lie* one whose name was writ i Vv ^hich

Ao t"*r i n . .................... -
ilese are some of the comments that m r
T identify with Keats's idealism, an ,/ !?r,,P < > , ,
v i t i a t e their contention that Keats's i/ W."1 Pfincip o ,
--h' .i ns. him
him aa Deconstructionist
U econsu u m u.eiuai. .....' mn,c nd sJ fCH
v Ci>|>ih
îtradictory
''ha<lic char-
f mlke iiriLint here is that these rem arks, within m
' The ajSl , be ta ken to rep resen t K eats's ironic a n /n T 'a bTO,m-
nC sh 11 I n the strict rh etorical im plications of the words ? d<i*Cal con'
life- They positively point to the f a c Z / h e Z l "
J i^ 'v / ex p ressio n a s a n a e s th e tic process rather than a final a c u m e n /
of P f C^ had no d o u b t w ritten m ature poetry, but his sense of a e s S c
By1 wiosophic v isio n w a s not satisfactory. Nature plays a vital role in the
Phl1 ding of his aesth etic am bitions and achievements.
tfd e fstan .Qy q u e stio n is, h o w d oes K eats's eco-consciousness engender
arid p h ilo s o p h ic a l exp ressio n and speculations? Nature is
his aesthV d by C o le rid g e , for exam p le, from a pantheistic and monistic
apprehende a u n iv e r s a l fo rce w h ich sheds light on man's spirituality,
jjjnensioir as ^ er WOrd s, th a t the question is examined from an eco-
fhis means, m ngion B eco m in g can be seen critically as a constructive
m etaphys^l a idealism / the argum ent being that the visionary ex-
deferral of sp . j j n tex ts are an indicator of supra-textual readings
^ therefore'no^ dc^sures b u t d yn am ic open-endedness. Is this the case
wifh Keats? b r of characteristic features in Keats's poetry

Though there are a n u m VVordsworth, his nature-consciousness
u ffiliate w ith C o le rid g e and Keats's poetry and prose show
z h a n d le the mat,er in a
I K - re83dr q u a lly that b i s p o e t r y - d s c "

It can b e argued e q u a l I y^ Yet, h is eco -p transcendental and,
hire from an o r g a m c is t vie P ^ the visionary a ^ ^ m ,hat of his
analyse, does n o t p la ce p ^ d im ension o n j wjthin thecon ,
therefore, the d o m in a n t s p in ' nature pnm j ntal|y as a un,ve
elder colleagues, fo r it ten d * to ^ over ,t fund sym.
of his aesthetic q u est ra j iongings- exq uisitc-ly P *j aS an
force or the b asis o f h .s s p a f " * * genius a ! Je H c itself,
Keats saw the se cre t o f * * n a tu re and a ^ ^ wasi ahP' % iden<
pathy w ith n a tu r e . A p p re . m om cn ' 0 hension- ^ rem-,r 5
ever-increasing a n d w ith
Keats in fu sed m o s t o f h lS P ggS/ w o re i P
in his ep isto lary s e lf- c o n s c io u
2o UoiuUnônUtorrtryCtiUi h ^ ^ point to the thread of
on the I m a g i n g " '" c s w Tnaicnted a n d P oetry/ 'I S to o d

thought of his rid er ro l ^ ^ ,T h e r o o t, 5 ' ^ C r i c k e t . .Q d e o n #
An cxainintth* ' j , ,q the Grasshopp ^ a rt/ Endymian,
Tip-toe upon a Wl, ^ , wcrc S ' ^ V ^ e m p l i f y Keats's self.
Nightingale, ' ' ' S ' '. . , nj 'Ode to Autu , aesthetics and to an ex-
'Hpistle to Drar l^ y n oU a nd ^ fabnc of h asth
'The Poet' conveys a strong osvcho-somatic existen ce,

nature situates its vitality to man p Y
A , M o m , a . N oon, at E ve, and M id d le N ig h t,
H e passes forth into the ch arm ed air
W ith talism an to call up spirits rare
From plant, cave, rock and fountam.-To his sign
The hush o f natural objects opens quite
To the core: and every secret essence there
Reveals the elem ents o f good and fa ir
M aking him see, w here Learning hath no light.
Som etim es, above the gross and p a lp a b le th in g s
O f this diurnal b all, h is spirit flies
O n aw ful w ing; and w ith its d estin d sk ies
H old s prem ature and m ystic com m u n in gs.
Till such unearthly intercou rses sh ed
A visible halo round h is m ortal h ead .
With regard to Romantic idealism, there are undoubtedly elem en ts h ere that
show Keats's enthusiasm for nature. The italicised sectio n e v in ce s b o th the
physical and m etaphysical dim ension of nature. T h e la st lin e s ca n also be
argued to demonstrate a transcendental bent. The m aturing creative and philo
sophical mind benefits immensely from natu ral la n d sca p e m o re th a n from
institutionalised learning. The title is an im p ortant clu e to th e q u estio n of
eco-psycho-aesthetics. The psychological relationship b e tw e e n the p o et and
nature provides creative material. In terms of aesthetics one w ou ld describe this
as the internalisation of natural imagery and exteriorisation through poetry.
In Sleep and Poetry Keats s basic interest h as to do w ith the m ap p ing of
h is artistic am bition, which entails a gradual and sp iral m o v em en t tow ards
aesthetic vision and excellence. O ne of the d evelop m ental p h a ses in this pro
gression has to do w ith eco-consciousness. N atu re th e re fo re u nd oubted ly
plays a fundam ental role in his poetics of b ecom in g a self-p ortray ed artist.
i K eats begins the poem w ith a series of rhetorical q u estion s, relating na
ture to his philosophical and psycho-aesthetic app rehension of sleep. As the
poem s title indicates, sleep and poetry are highly in tertw in ed , sleep seen
here not as a psycho-som atic state of dorm ancy, b u t as a psycho-aesthetic
state w hich generates and enhances creative p rod u ctiv ity K eats no doubt
adulates nature s beauty and grandeur. N ature serves as a kind of nativity, a
m use or a springboard to the p o et's artistic q u est, w h ereb y h e show s the
i
SU-self in poesy; so [ may d<) fh

That my own soul has to its e lf d > ^ >C
Then I will pass the countries thitT**1,
In long perspective, and continual/ ^
Taste their p u re fountains. First t!,
O Flora, and old Pan: sleep in th 6 I 'll
Feed upon apples red, and s t r a w h ^ 8'
And choose each pleasure that T * * 8'
(L. 96-104) m y fancy sees
Flora and Pan h e r e r e f e r to K e a t s 's m e

Greek m ythology. T h o u g h K e a t s 's sch em
I gazed awhile, and felt as light, and free

As though the fanning wings of Mercury
Had played upon my heels: I was light-hearted,
And many pleasures to my vision started;
(L. 23-26)
This excerpt su g g ests an exp erien ce with a mystical and sublime aspect,
what he even later qu alifies as a natural sermon (L. 71). The inspiring com
ponent of nature is noted w ith the rhetorical question that the poet asks,
' For what has m a d e the sag e o r p o e , w rite/B u . the fair paradise of
Nature's light?" (L. 1 2 5 -1 2 6 ) r of nature, showing that
Keats goes further to describe the * 8 P ^ act of writing poetry, but
nature is not m erely concerned with receptive to it:
could serve a medical p u rp o se to w hoever is p
The breezes were etheral, and pure,

And crept through half closed lattices to cu
The languid sick; it cool'd their fever e '
And soothed them into slumbers fu an thjrsting,
Soon they awoke cleared eyed: nor urn
Nor with hot fingers, nor with temp es
(L. 221-226)
I Uornrv
2)2 Readingson . ct on the creativ e im agina-
.. 0 f the breeze and it* 11 t ev is h ere evo k ed . O ne
The Romantic sy W orJsW orth, Coleridge, an gitivity to the w ay air af-
tmn, commoi obviously express K 0 . an d psycho-pathology,
w hich K eats had stu died in h is . e to th e b o d y a n d s o u l. is e co -

tic or p h arm aceu tical im p o rtan ce o f m d c o n n e c t io n , b u t b r in g s to
th erap eu tic p ersp ectiv e is n ot j u s t a C o
mind post-Novalian philosophy. , burg 1 7 7 2 -1 8 0 1 ) w as very preoc-
Novalis (Friedrich Freiherr von H of mature in human life, a cele-
cupied with the pharmaceutical ope of m a n . H e ad o p ted a hom e-
bration of both the psychic and soma cg o f natU re an d h u m an
opathic tradition to explain is ^ P ^ aceutical p rin cip le, a poison
consciousness, stressing that nat Î nuisite for w h o len ess and the
and a healer. He saw illness as a P s,t^ P ^ * e p h arm aceu tical principle.
soul as the embodiment in th is ph enom en on.
There is a connection betw een Novaiis anu isko. r , ,
121 In f a " . Keatss brooding* over nature actually p e n t to a n u m b er o f con
cerns that are intricately related to his study of m edical sc.e n ce s and h is phi
losophy of the imagination. The nature of the R om antic im ag in atio n here is
its aesthetic implications and how it connects inextricably w it is progres-
sive philosophy of life. The concern here is not unrelated to K eats s im agina
tive view of art, expressed in a letter to G eorge and T h o m a s K ea ts, dated
December 21,1817.
T he excellence of every Art is its intensity, ca p a b le o f m a k in g a ll d is a g re e a b le s

evaporate, from their bein g in close relation sh ip w ith B e a u ty a n d T ru th (Jo h n
K eats: Letters, 370)
Keats's notion of beauty and truth is highly inclusive. T h at is, it b lend s all
life's experiences or apprehensions, negativ e or p o sitiv e , in to a h o listic
vision. Art and nature, therefore, are seen as therapeutic in function.
Keats's views on nature are not to be found only in his poetry b u t also in
his letters. Writing to Tom (1818), he associates nature w ith poetic inspiration
and expression. In other letters to George and Thom as K eats (1817), he talks
of the negative capability of the poet that calls for a sy n aesth etic and em-
pathic vision in life, to Reynolds (1818), he asserts the conviction that all de
partments of knowledge are to be seen as excellence and calculated towards
a great w hole, to John Taylor (1818), he outlines certain axiom s of poetry
among which is the notion that if poetry com es not naturally as the leaves to
a tree, it had better not come at all. All these connect the im agination with
nature-consciousness and dem onstrate an affinity w ith the Plotinist or
Spinozist m onism inherent in W ordsw orth and C olerid ge. But the major
issue lies in apprehending nature as part of the creative process rather than
the poet's adherence to nature's spirituality.
Readi"8 S o Ut
the letter to Tom, m ore specifically v- Cticism
in 293
|* is vital
dscape v,.at in
mm the
e understanding
,a nding oo ^f ^Z M^ e' W * ^ o. . n o .f,,
Ian
what astonish me more than anything is tho .

the moss, the rock-weed; if I m 8 he tone, the Co]n .
'uch PlaceS The Sp3CeS/ the maSnitude of ^ *** t ^ 8' slê, the
^ e d before one sees them; bu, this a" d
^rpass every imaginat,on and defy any rememh r ^ e lle c S f are "ell
J d henceforth write more than ever, for the Th ^ 1sha11 leam 1 * must
a mite to that mass of beanH/ . . bstract endr,.._ m Petryherp
rials, &y lIie 111 " ar uua/ pu
fellow s. (John Keats: Letters, 402)
What one can discern here about Keats's strono ,

imaginative intensity isthat nature's material d , J nT cn/ f rceP" an,
aesthetic composition of poetry, but poetry that delink, Ûte only th
sion of life and existence. One sees a strand of eknhras 3 dêp aPPreher
and internalisation of the scenery urges the search for - 5 *he observatioi
image for utterance. So the letter sheds light on the aPProPnate Ian
fological implications of Keats's nature-consciousness InThtSnsland 0r
has to be infused with complex insights of human existence
'Ode to a Nightingale' one can d is c e r n _______ ,
hat soft incense hangs upon the hough,

But, in embalmed darkness, guess each sweet
Wherewith the seasonable month endows
The grass, the thicket, and the fruit-tree wild;
White hawthorn, and the pastoral eglantine;
Fast fading violets cover'd up in leaves;
And mid-May's eldest child,
The coming musk-rose, full of dewy wine,
The murmurous haunt of lies on summer e\ es.
(Stanza V, L. 41-50) hadowing the
These lines express the sp len d o u r of spring whi ^ êauty and lux
Proach of summer, w hich w ill have its own storf >for intense speculat
s earlier said, nature here seem s to be a f iue which strongly pr
m face of the im perm anence and muta 1 ity
^Pies the poet.
2^4 Readings on Literary Criticism
R der a pVienomenologi-
To put in other words, the sung logical meta m o ^ h o sis that en-
cal process of seH-transformahon or a pJ<- * ab,c through death. Yet the
hances a deep desire for the eternal andiun a9jsing the m atenal and
poet submits to a stoical fortitude, ystruggle to m a.ntam a perma-
sensuous realm of existence rather han tn ,cm atjsed as .magmahve
nent and idealistic state. This has often dc F ambivalence between re-
failure, or as a characteristic Keats,an trademark
ality and imaginative illusion. Coleridge- T h e R om antics as
Joseph Swann's "Shelley, Keats an m eneutic and phenomeno-
Deconstructionists" (1995) has dismisse language of the ode is
logical basis of reading this poem. He argue j n ^ js deconstruction-
physical and highly characterised by impede p 0 e m is knowing
ist position Swann contends that the subjec anent in every WOrd, the
and unknowing, the death of meaning tha in escap able eroticism of
dark otherness in the objects we m eet' , underm ines any recourse to
meaningful discourse
The issue, as to why this happens as exemplified
exemp lin in the last stanza of the
poem, is a philosophical and spiritual disposition that s ou e iscusse
within the context of Romantic idealism however problem atic it w as.
Though greatly infused with natural description, two im portant extracts
from Endymion can best illustrate Keats's ontological perception and under
standing of nature:
W herein lies H appiness? In that w hich b ecks
O ur ready m inds to fellow divine;
A fellow ship w ith divine essence, till w e shine
Full alchym ized and free of space. Behold
T he clear Religion of H eaven . . .
{Endym ion 1. 777-781)
at the tip top,

T here h an gs by unseen film , an orbed drop
O f light, and that is love: Its influence,
T hrow n in our eyes, genders a novel sense,
At w hich w e start and fret; till in the end,
M eltin g into its radiance, w e blend ,
M ingle, and so becom e a part of it . . .
(Endym ion 1. 805-811)
These excerpts bear a close affinity w ith C olerid ge's N eo-Platonist views
and therefore connect a common thread of thought betw een the two poets.
The first lines may be rightly read as K eats's affirm ation of his belief in
Platonic or transcendental reality, given that they express in like manner the
w orkings of the imagination as an associative and spiritual faculty. Divine
Rea<iings
0 o w s h ,p with essence will be s, .... W ,.
and prmap/es in nature. Sst.n,SI'<'s,U(J '" r,.
Logos, or transcendent reality ,n C" te l*/ P-MiH,,,
experiences or ,n the final ou ,n hich "to,p ru(H in *
K eats u s e s chemical t h . , . 1' of be,. fui* in ht,fo t f e P'lke
disposition. Alchemy has ta d ' V to advan? ' n& f W ^ aw>b, " ^ <1 fo,^ '"
from a base to a higher subsH 'V'd> tJ>e Cb an eth V * '" 'M ontit*
excerpt above also strengthen u' ,,ls p ! ' lc and e
thetics, p h ilo so p h y a n d sp ir?tS b 's Sc'o n tif f e * it e L ,Cess <>ftra '!,SoPhicai
work onpthis
hetics, T '^princip
n u osame f e cUa.% Keafe
spirituality. Keats C T " " " 8,n
analOgies ? X'steee
apprehends" of"art'
rn,aon
aes-
^ r k on this sam e principle. So his allusions to sc. n ce a l ' creavi,y
cr>(iw ,.to
Ip iric a l term s, but in im agin ative, aesthetic and philns T ' be in
'at it in other w ords, sense im pressions are i m a g i n a S Ph,Cal ,erms- To
distilled- This leads to h igh er form s, ethereal f o fm s and r C"centrated and
aturity and philosophical acuity. nd hnally to aesthetic
m The second excerp t also gives an insight into what Keats
been propagating in his nature-m ystic thought. It aptly i u s H f E T d * have
W h o len ess and unity exem plified with the verbsêltine h, hf. stru88le
ling, and becoming. All o f these verbs are dynamic verbs, fu ggestiârere
focus awareness o f p ro cess and the active interaction between psyche and
nature. These w o rd s all relate to C oleridge's definition of the secondary
imagination and the p o e t in ideal perfection, where we find counterparts
such as partake, synthesise, diffuse, dissipates, and dissolve which share the
same characteristic features discussed above.
The basic prem ise of the im agination as inspiration and at the same time
a base for epistem ological and ontological investigation, therefore, becomes
justified. Reality, as it w ere, is sanctioned by the philosophical injunction of
becoming, since life is seen as a continuous process rather than a static or an
end product. To p u t it differently, a certain goal is perceived which cannot be
interpreted from the p oem s as achieved but rather as an anticipated end.
The poem which K eats w rote that has attracted much attention with re
gard to nature is 'To A u tu m n .' H ow ever, the controversy surrounding it is a
result of the d iffe r e n t theoretical and critical perspectives that are employed
.. ,, veiled expression of Keats s
to read and interpret it. The historicists see tic.historical t r e a t y
revolutionary ideals, a n d , A ssent (1997), and particularly John
Nicholas Roe's Keats a n d t h e C u t . J r d the Poems" (2000), offer g ^
Keats's 'Green W orld:' Politics, a Roe's approach, ^
or
exa1P. ilncings,
example of such a historical read,nS. rtistiC/aesthetic or spintua g ^
plored nature imagery, n o t in te rm s^ d o usness of EnSj?J ^ is seen as a
but in terms of K eats's socio-political c Gfeek Flora and Pan)
hire (in connection w ith the glori ica ^ peace, and free vigion and
symbolic representation of the ideas o expression of ar 1 ^ implicit
The structuralists see it as a culrmru , jn jt is an exp ,g p Ô d e s
Maturity, arguing that the ripeness exp deur, Helen Ven
translation of aesthetic ach ievem ent an
I ^ lviV/1 a. v v V * U U U m *
any r- ' . d undermines its critical judgem ent can be
So the P m.s^ ra'nSing, however p ee,v* ? J / c r W ordsw orth, Keats and the
eating gP rf e" O ' R o u r k e ' s Keats's
found thought
in Susan/mean
Wolfsongs in w (1987) and Jam es wQ estion
u
Interrogative Mode m Romantic y .
Odes and Contemporary C ^ ^ ^ n a l y s e d the poem from w ithin its in-
Romantic visionary enhasm has a y eUher on the grou n d s of ar-
terpretative matrix from PrmCipJ T d i l pattern o f the seaso n s therein
chetypal criticism with regard to the y w ith th e u n ifica tio n and
implied, or from a monistic perspective a e 6
wholeness of nature. expressing K eats's organicist
W h a t i s c e r t a i n i s t h a t t h e p o e m e ^ ^ ^ ^ h i c h correlates w ith the
conception of life and poetic f * pr P obviously still conscious of not
having written much for posterity. It should therefore b e ren terated that the
aesthetic, philosophical and spiritual implications or dispositions o f the poem
can be interpreted with regard to the question of becom ing rather than the view
that it represents Keats's full imaginative vision and a ch iev em en t as the
Romantic visionary critics or structuralists would expound.
This interpretation is connected with the philosophical speculations that
run through 'The Human Seasons' and the sonnet 'After dark vapou rs have op
press'd our plains.' They all complement the seasons w ith m editation and con
templation on life and death. 'The Human Seasons/ for instance, reads thus:
Four seasons fill the measure of the year;
There are four seasons in the mind of man:
He has his lusty Spring, when fancy clear
Takes in all beauty with an easy span:
He has his Summer, when luxuriously
Spring's honied cud of youthful thought he loves
To ruminate and by such dreaming nigh
His nearest unto heaven: quiet coves
His soul has its Autumn, when his wings
He furleth close; contented so to look
On mist in idlenessto let fair things
Pass by unheeded as a threshold brook
He has his Winter too of pale misfeature
Or else he would forgo his mortal nature.
This poem 's intricate relating nf
human life which culminates with d e a t w T 8 7 ^ th e d ifferen t Phases
/ learly im plicates K eats's concern
inHon I.jj,.
r,ry C.ritjt is,,,
297
alm or s s h o p p e r a n d C ric k e t' and 'Bright Star, would I were sted-

** 'On the C ra ^ Gf K e a ts 's so n n ets that necessitate critical investiga-
-t as th u art are to th e p r e s e n t d eb a te on nature. In the former poem,
with sta te m e n ts th a t g o b ey o n d the deceptive simplicity of the
!2m 's title:

r f parth is never dead.
n e p0euThe birds are faint with the hot sun,
When all tne v i treeS/ a v o ic e w ill ru n
And hide in c o o i g th e new-mown m ead ;
Fr0ffl hehdgG ra ssh o p p e r's-h e takes the lead
That is the Gras PP_ hag never done
In Summer s luxu y, tjred out with fun
Wi*h ? a , eeags e b e n e a th s o m e p le a s a n t h ee d .
He rests at ea reasing never.
The poetry of ear when the frost
On a lone winter e v e n in g , ^ gtove there shnUs
Has w rou ght a s ile n c , th in c r e a s in g ever,
The C rick et's s o n g , i sin eSS h a lf lo st,
A ndseem
And seem s wto o n e "---------
c g r a ssy h ills.
The G
The rasshoopppper
G rassh er'ss among
a m o i g some grassy ^ ^ exhausted is a
,t ._ t flao n n p tfV
e poet's ecological assertion that the P*~*P[a n n ot have enough of the great
îteration o f the S p in o z ist idea that inspired by any season, give" th
asures of nature. P oetic com p osition ca ^ and creative spring-
prehension that an y seaso n can be a ge takes a seemingly simf
rrent thematic
?matic issue, alread y m entioned a*-b o j e,, ^. are
menuox e natui*'s
naturc =>e,em ^
tension in this poem
in this poem .. T
Thh ee grasshop
grasshopp p er
er and ^ the changing season. In com
nature,
aland conveyAifft,rpnt
differenttim timeeaxes
axesminter ^ UK>nd
tenJ? blend 0f 0 faesthetics
aestheticsaan>
^^
the nightingale
to the n ich tin eale p o em , one sees . d spiritual dispos
insight to philosophical and P
at the same time an n<
( /
ms KiNulUn^ on u u n' ry CnUL'H ^ t il im age, the star. T h e star

, with an eUimen m ed itative and con-
The latter p<*'m w corn-i. âraeterses the P ^ t is obviously tt
c o n d o r , .ho to be a b itte r tid e s". T h is *.
templativc nun e. P nes9 to get away fro b ecau se h e anticipates
a consequence of his willmgnc. t> tendency, but becau se r
is not because of any illusory o - :n and despair. . . .
a realm of existence ihat surpasses p a " * o f P oetry to B n to h Rom anU asm ;
Susan Wolfson's Formal c d
harges-tn
C Aopted in T h e Questioning
(1997) furthers her deconstruchomst st Mo(Je Romantic Poetry
Presence: W ordsworth, Keats and the inter s#s p o etry is o v erp o w ered
(1987). In the latter work, she claimed tfes Q( m ea n in g sin ce any at-
with questioning without providing any jn form er sh e em pha-
tempted meaning leads to an interpretive imp o etrv ' s fo rm s u n d erm in e
sises the view that Keats's lyrics show W ith reg ard to 'B rig h t
the claims of form to create a o f fo rm " to regis.
^
d
leg
riv
p
Star,' she argues that the dash at the e^ J f other wordS/ th e p oem
ter "the radical insecurities of experience (lo7)*
only confirms unreadability and undecidability.
It should be reiterated that Keats's philosophical con cep io n o 1 e w as
based on suffering and agony. These were necessary qu alities th at stren gth
ened metaphysical longing and capacity. R om antic id e a lism fa v o u red this
herm eneutic and phenom enological outlook on life. A t th is ju n c tu re , w e
w ant here to address and emphasise the question of the p o e m 's in sp iratio n
b y the natural phenomenon, the lum inous star. K eats h e re cle a rly u tilises
and reduces nature to his distinctive aesth etic and p h ilo s o p h ic a l a m b i
tion s. H e does not seem to treat it as a u n iv ersa l fo rce as C o le r id g e or
W ordsw orth persistently does in his pantheistic and m o n istic en gag em en ts
even though it has been illustrated that there are strands of C o lerid g ean and
W ordsworthian consciousness in his work. But h is recourse to natu re points
strongly to his consciousness of process, given h is u n d e rsta n d in g of it as
constituting the path that leads to a more m ature aesthetic v isio n and philo-
sophmal speculation in life. A considerable part of K ea ts's p o etry undoubt
edly dem onstrates how internalising ecology en gen d ers reo rien tatio n and
m aturity m aesthetic longings.
The foregoing analyses have pointed to nature con sciou sness in Keats's
p oetic practices. Existing critical readings have n o t paid m u ch attention to
is p enom enon in Keats and the present argum ents cannot claim to have
attem pted an exhaustive view on the matter. Though K ea ts's ooetrv indicates
the difficulties of tracing a clear line betw een aeiv,,.o P
. , 6 . . oerween aestheticism and spirituality, the
argum ents here are more inclined to aestheticism and philosophy rather than
spirituality given tha Keats consciously uses nature to satisfy the former end
even though this poetry gives allowance to the interpretation of the latter.
H e undoubtedly utilises and reduces nature. Vet, one can argue that his
natu re poetry does not only lim it itself to an individualised traiS. Them are
certain ly strands of pantheistic and m onistic readings in h is w ork, pointing
the shared affinities between k. ,
spiritual thought of the likes of r T *lnd th Qh
I atis open to further critical rf u ri(Jge ^nak. ticim
* The suggestionhere w1 ^ C S '" Philo*.
study of K ils an d th e en viro n d b e ,f><U a 0 r,i. T h .^ 'M an
endeavour. I t w o u ld th e n be n m n t ca n k ni(>re in.d 18 an jSls c
he persistently h a n d le s th e s u b f ^ ^ * k ^ o w t SubK>efP ^ an<* e*h
the First G eneration R o m a n tir * w i *h th fr ^ i k f ^ o tk * hautiv(
yiouslynot mere aesthetics ***** did ^ Su*e
The argument is that Kea, , 8 Ven "> ^ v e#
even though largely discussedh interiorisin alUr<*
becomingas aesthetic develnn d here viJ 8 an<* e*f y s ob*
with Coleridge's
hecv11***',0 . , / o Worsd^
orr W o rsd w oPmeiuand
A ---- -- ^
rth 's pi Dk-. of estaM urisi^g of
- fkiheistic
sColendge
t i c and s u
and monistic
. PhllS0Dhv
m on istic phjjrtb
philosophy.s K Cy of self in ûversalism
^ ch"^
^corr of
e u n i^ C p0 nh1
p Pnr exam p le K e a ts 's a e sth e tic sp eculation s in poems like 'Sleep an
, sto o d T ip -toe U p o n a L ittle H ill' and 'The Fall of Hyperion' den
q
poetrY' cerU in im p o rta n t stra n d s of sim ilarities with Coleridge's 'Kubl

onstrf ^ levels of aesth eticism an d spirituality. As 'Kubla Khan' depici
Khan Thetical n atu re of aesth etic an d spiritual enthusiasm, vision and cor
the antl do K eats's n a tu re p oem s. They can be read and interpreted ecc
tinuity' sr^ ie d elin eate p rim arily his aesthetic and philosophical engage
critically- yco n strU c tiv e q u e st. K eats him self consciously mapped hi
ments |n 1 : lr.oODh ica l a n d sp iritu a l developm ent with expressions lik
aesthetic, p an(j P a n ", "th e cham ber of maiden thought", "the dar
" * e f > lm, J v a ie o f te a rs " , "th e spiritual yeast and ferment", "the cham
^ o f T g h t" an d "th e v ale of sou l m aking".
Endnotes
1 I have argued Keats's spirituality on the grounds of Gnosticism in Towards a

Pi^dcs of Becoming: Sam uel Taylor Coleridge's and John Kea.s's Aes.heUcs
Between Idealism and Deconstruction (2006). s j s handledI j n C g p g S o ^
and the Gnostic Tradition: Inner-Self Searching and e 8 d
textual evidence, no doubt, in establishing a link bvtw^n Keats s nature p ry
the nature poets on grounds of spirituality an rans Disease, and Death
2. See, for examp,e, David Farrell fnoôm ptete and
in German Idealism and Romanticism (19 ), ideag ghare an affinity
available copy of N ovalis's work in Englis , u concept of nature and self,
with most of his German counterparts, especial 3Y duces the question of nature,
He however adds a dim ension to his analyses a to add here that Nova is s
Petry, imagination and psychopathology. K 1S 1 ^ tausm/Romanticism than mig
influence was felt greatly in American Transcen in french philosop ica
have been the case in England. He is also very common
circles.
300 Readings on Literary Criticism
References
h tto www.asle.umn.edu/conf/wla/1994/
Glotfelty, Cheryll, "What is Ecocriticism , http.w
glotfelty.html 14/04/2008. O IJP 1990.
Keats, John. Works. Ed. Elizabeth Cook. Ox or ' rd University Press, 2002.
Selected Letters. Ed. Grant F. Scott. Mass^ , th Qerman Idealism and
Knell, David Farrell. Contagion, Sexuality, Disease, and Deatntn
Romanticism. Bloomington: Indiana University G ainesville: University
O Rourke, James. Keats's Odes and Contemporary Criticism.
Press of Florida, 1998. j . r'Ur^nfinn Press 1997
Roe, Nicholas. John Keats and the Culture o f D issent x Challenges o f
"John Keats's "Green World": Politics, Nature and the Poem s, The C M ta g e s qf
Keats: Bicentenary Essays 1795-1995. Eds. Allan Christensen et al. Amsterdam,
GA: Rodopi, 2000,61-77. a / c/
Scheese, Don. "Some Principles in Ecocriticism" http: / /www.as e.um n.e u con
other_conf/wla/1994/scheese.html 15/08/2008
Swann, Joseph, "Shelley, Keats and Coleridge: The Romantics as
Deconstructionists," The Keats Shelley Journal, 1995.
Tag, Stan. "Four Ways of Looking at Ecocriticism" http: / /www.asle.umn.edu/conf/
other_conf /wla /1994 /tag.html 15/04/2008
Vendler, Helen. The Odes o f John Keats. Havard: HUP, 1981.
Wolfson, Susan J. The Questioning Presence: Wordsworth, Keats and the Interrogative
Mode in Romantic Poetry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987.
"Romanticism and the Question of Poetic Form," Questioning Romanticism. Ed. John
Beer. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1 9 9 5 ,1 7 -4 5 .
Formal Charges: The Shaping of Poetry in British Romanticism. Stanford: SUP, 1997.
Charles Ngiewih TEKE, PhD, June 2008

Senior Lecturer
Departm ent of English
H igher Teacher Training College (ENS) Yaounde
University of Yaounde I, Cameroon
1
g l o s s a r y
critic O ne who hclivv

> H> >'' M-a.
, reader A k m drvi*M b y - o,
^ iB r,,vd reJl,t; r :'nd hc actual lfK*"fS W>r t . "*< w
4 rex* >,nd aN ,ds '* According to L r' a c t u <! ^'sfi,<Mui c * r v 'f o/
nonns a n d ^ ~ ~r
P n tfu r '~eA~
d fo s. -----' tb a c fu a i d e r c()ni P e rs0n J T 0 * " id s , ^
urifx'rH
- >nJi IK' P - u c t.d , , and
on an individ- a/ Wher,
^ w lric trad in g A term used b y Louise M. R osenbl.ff ^
A t o n a l Theory o f the L itera ry W ork (1978) to d e s c r i b ^ f ^ * e8* r' Text th, o
a reader transacts w ith a text. D uring this event the *1 ** f readjng o M h e " ^
" readers m ake o f th eir resp on ses to the artistic stim , bject of aesthete com* Pr,Cess
^ I / T b je c t . such as a statu e, or a set o f verba?^ ^ 3
^ ne of their responses to the tex t." T he term refers to P a uR ders t e m p l a t e their b 3
fand how individual readers find and create meaning when f o a n t c d n 'T T resP " * a
e on the p- f^ to s :
Ithetics The branch o f philosophy that deals with the concept of rh* w
Mdetermine the criteria for b eau ty in a w ork o f art. It asks such nil~ T eautlful d strives
& . is the source o f b eau ty ? In the ob ject? In the perceive" W ^ n ? ^ , 5 ^
beauty recognized? Uty and How is
aesthetic theory A system atic, philosophical body of beliefs concerning how meaning
and functions in texts, especially the elem ent of beauty or pleasure. occurs
affective fallacy A term used by N ew Critics to explain that a reader's emotional response to
a text is neither im portant nor equivalent to its interpretation. Believing those who evaluate a
work of art on the basis of its em otional effect on its perceiver to be incorrect, New Critics assert
that the affective fallacy confuses w hat a poem is (its meaning) and what it does. The term was
first introduced by W illiam K. W im satt, Jr., and M onroe C. Beardsley, who believed that a
poem's meaning was determ ined solely from a close reading of a text.
affective stylistics A term coined by the reader-oriented critic Stanley Fish to describe his
reading strategy (also referred to as recep tion aesthetics). Fish believes that the meaning of a
text resides in the read ing co m m u n ity to w hich the reader belongs, what Fish calls the
interpretive community. The interpretation of a text, therefore, depends on a reader's subjec
tiveexperience in one or m ore o f these interpretive communities.
African-American criticism An approach to literary analysis that develops a black aes-
toetics to be applied when in terp retin g African-Am erican writings. One of its leading advo-
otes' Henry Louis C ates, Jr., b eliev es such an aesthetics provides a new theoretical frame-
r 0? for developing and analyzing the ever-growing and popular African f
* new framework, G ates Insists that African-American literature be viewed as a form of
no( as a representatj()n afs ociaI practices or culture. Accor 'u
' must be derived from the black tradition itself and must mcludewhathe ^ ^
^ ageof blackness, the signifying difference which makes t re declaring that
' Gates asserts the "double-voicedness" of African-Amer.can literatunr, dec
301
302 Glossary
, ihe white and the black. It Is the joining of
this literature draws upon two voices and cultures of this literature. See cultural
h two discourses, soys G s.cs, that ,hc U" '
studies and postcolonialism. instincts housed in the unconscious, the
g*relv instinct According to Freud, one o jnstincts can work harmoniously,
other being the sexual instinct, ot libido. Although these two
often they act as enemies. See destructive instinc . critic Rertolt Brecht to describe his
alienation effect A term coined by the Marxist t e* êctations when viewing a drama. For
technique to interrupt the theater audience s norma e P ^ acôrs directly appeal to the au-
example, in the middle of a drama, Brecht may ave one j the mQral and social issues
dience via song or speech to keep the audience cons an y
to which they are being exposed. ^ Qr idea rcpresents another. The
allegoric reading A reading in which one d ra c , P ' ind endent of the action in the
characters, events, or places within a text represent me g ^ V ^ be moral/ political,
surface story. These interpretations are most often religio , j
personal, or satiric.
allophone The family of nearly identical speech sounds that comprise a phoneme. For exam
ple, the sound of the p in pit and the p in spit are allophones or slight variants of the p oneme /p/.
alterity A term used by postcolonialists to refer to the state or quality of a person being
labeled "different" or "other." This sense of otherness excludes the individual from a position of
power and labels the person as inferior, subhuman, savage, and oftentimes evil.
Amazon feminism A contemporary approach to feminist criticism that is dedicated to female
images, either fictional or real, in literature and art that emphasize the physiques of female ath
letes and physical equality of both males and females. It argues that no m ention of gender
should arise when discussing such topics as occupations. No characteristics exist that are pecu
liarly masculine or feminine.
ambiguity Commonly defined as a stylistic error in everyday speech in which a word or ex
pression has multiple meanings. Since the publication of W illiam Em pson's Seven Types of
Ambiguity (1930) and the specialized use of this term adopted by New Criticism, ambiguity is
now synonymous with plurisignation, both terms implying the complexity and richness of po
etic language that allows for a word or expression to simultaneously have two or more distinct
meanings. New Critics believe that ambiguity becomes one of the chief tools that good poets use
intentionally and effectively to demonstrate the multiple valid meanings of a word or expres
sion. See connotation and denotation.
aiuil stage Sigmund Freud's second stage of child development in which the anus becomes
the object of pleasure when the child learns the delights of defecation.
analytical psychology Founded and developed by Carl Gustav Jung, this system of psychol
ogy is akin to psychoanalysis, with its emphasis on the functions that the conscious and the un-
Cr ? T P 3y " V nfj uencm8 human behavior Emphasizes hum ankind's racial origins and
adapts the use of the free-association technique in studying an individual's problems.
Anglo-American feminisms A contemporary feminist theory and criticism authored by
British and American feminist critics, notably Virginia Woolf, Judith Fetterley, Annette Kolodny,
Nina Baym, Elaine Showalter, Sandra Gilbert, Susan Gubar, and others.
anima A term used by Carl J ung in mythic criticism to describe the archetype of the feminine
in the male.
animus A term used by Carl Jung in mythic criticism to describe the archetype of the mascu
line in the female.
an ti-cath ex es A term used by Freud in his economic m odel of the unconscious. In this
m odel the pleasure principle is held in check by the anti-cathexes, an anticharge of energy
governed by the reality principle that inhibits free rein of the pleasure principle in an individ
u al's psyche.
ce ph**e ne of *our Phases that cor, ^ '^ sa rv
303
f> 7 mPrlst>nmcn*' frus*">'>". nd fc . *"v" *'an, ji. '*"> c.
^ *n ifi g
,w
, ^ . _ _ Jintr to the German
According to the German phi|sopher c . ,l*ntrv . pt
Uri*rV ..Work! of It,*
* ,,f
terstatement, or antithesis. Out
. ojunterstalement, C)ut i T 01* H'Rel (li for *1h*
1
tr* -a . isB
^ .id ea,
. called .he a.ynthM|.,
y n .h .,1 ., develnp,.
devel, 1 d,'b- ' - a n d ^ C ' f v-'V -h ,.i. _ 'U
"d d l* u ^ V
'wf rnism's undeddabilitv
peetnaedemism's undecidahili.y ah...
about (he natl , h*u dn<J ^
e>d* .r,n is also used m deconstruction theory a "'allty and ,i
< p a lin g statements that cannot be r e s o l v e d ^ , ' ' " * P a r a d , " *
** -L k . A t - u g h . into literary criticism via ,h C n,raJiction,. d,c,i. and
C According to Richards, human beinES a rt n ' Wrilings of the (
RichaKis hcrliovesthat to achieve psychic ^ ? ,lc s y bu dk, c r i t i c , . A,
^ W bv creating a personally acceptable vision of t h l K every Person m ,es,res called
^ i o a S h a r d s declares that poetry can now b e s ^ or,d ^ e a s baIa"ce t h ^
^ ' , e s and create a fulfilling and intellectually a cce p ta b l^ "126 3nd sati4 hum V 3r Vided
^ r r riesan
d
l i t Also known as practical criticism. In applied c r itic i^ u Cnticis to a partir ,
^jfand explains, evaluates, or justifies a particular text. def^ the standard ^
wjietypal criticism An approach to literary analysis th *
S o p Frye, and other critics to literary analysis. An a r c h e d , theories Carl lun.
Kms of repeated human experiences (archetypes) found ^ g es o r?
other works of art. mn a specrftc text and common to
archetype A recurrent plot pattern, image, descriptive detail n u
the reader strong but illogical responses. This term was b r o u e h H n ^ r ? ^ that evokes from
psychological writings of Carl Jung. Jung believed that the mind w 7 ry Criticism v* the
the personal conscious, the personal unconscious, and the collect! mposed f three parts;
within the mind in the collective unconscious is the collective kn Un5 nscious- tying deep
memories of humanity's past. Formed through the repeated excerion <? humanity' * e
knowledge can be tapped through images of birth, death rebirth th e^ * humankind' this
within a text and can cause profound emotions to surface within a readerSeasons' and so forth
arche-writing (a rch i-e critu re ) A term used by the deconstnirHîc, r
G e o l o g y (1974) to assert that language is a kind of writing. Derrida m a t h a f w n ^ g
T be reduced to letters or other symbols tnscribed on a page. Rather, writing is d i r e c t ^
lated to what Saussure believed to be the basic element of language: difference. We can k n o Ja
word because it differs from another word. The word tall could just as easily have become sail in
American English. This freeplay or element of undecidability in any system of communication
Derrida defines as writing.
Aristotelian poetics The name given to the underlying principles of interpretation found in
Aristotle's Poetics. In this work, Aristotle states the first definition of tragedy. The Poetics has
nowbecome the cornerstone of Western literary criticism.
artifact Any product of artistic endeavor, such as a poem, a novel, a painting, a short story,
so on. The word implies that the artistic endeavor can be analyzed or studied to ascertain its
meaning because an artifact "som ething created by humans," and therefore is an analyzable en-
or object.
* * * A linguistic term designating a sound such as the p in pat, in which a brief delay oc-
fore pronouncing the vowel sound with an accompanying release of air.
S t,VC readin8 Coined by the post-Althusserian Marxist critic Pierre Macherey to de-
deoW tyê read*ng that reveals the m ultiple ideologies operating in given toxt.. 5
rwrit^ es often w ork d irectly ag ain st w hat the writer assumes he or she is y g
304 Glossary
, .. .{L.r to the existence of a text. For the
_ hv New Critics tna . iect that can be analyzed.
N ^ w c l h U ^ x t existsVn its own riftht as ' ^ critic who insists on im posing extrinsic
1 UV Now Critics for the knu . t to discover its meaning.
Including M ikh ail ^ w h. * .
Bakhtin Circle A group of Uussian scholars a, Rcvolution and its rule under Joseph
dressed the social and cultural in flu en ces^ VUcbsU and then L eningrad , Russia, and
Stalin. The group met from 1913 un ^ WnoVf and others.
included Bakhtin, P. N. Medvedev, V. in. economic structure of society. According to
base A term used by Karl Marx to designate ^ the relationships they engender
Marx, the various methods of economic proau m asserts that the capitalists exploit the
form the base. In the United States, for examp , w orking conditions; their salaries
working classes, determining for them their salanes and trie
and working conditions are the base term introduced into literary theory by Jacques
binary operations (binary oppositions) which he believes W estern m etaphysics is
Derrida to represent the conceptual oppositions on
based, such as light/dark, good/bad, and b ig /sm a . ôcrriv it
A term coined by die feminist critic Elaine Showalter to t a a f e f one rf.four
biological model
models or ways to construct a female framework for analyzing w om ens literature, a process
models or ways to c o iw u u female body marks itself on a text by pm-
termed gynocriticism. This model emphasizes how trie y r
viding a host of literary images along with a personal, intimate tone,
black arts movement Spans the decade from 1965 to 1975, beginning w ith the assassination
of Malcolm X, and advocates black power or militant advocacy of arm ed self-defense while in
spiring a renewal and pride in African heritage and asserting the goodness and beauty of all
things black. Its chief spokesperson was the Greenwich Village beat poet Am iri Baraka and its
literary magazine, Cricket.
bourgeoisie According to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist Manifesto (1848),
this term refers to the social elite, or members of the upper class, who control and define the eco
nomic base of society through economic policies and the production of goods. The bourgeoisie also
defines a society's superstructure and its hegemony.
canon The collected works of an author or of a tradition.
capitalist Another name given to the bourgeoisie by Marx and Engels. The capitalists in society
enslave the working class (the proletariat) through economic policies and the production of goods.
carnival Coined by the Russian Formalist critic M ikhail Bakhtin to describe some novels'
polyphonic style that is, some novels have a carnival sense of the w orld, a sense of joyful aban
donment in which many different voices are simultaneously heard and directly influence their
hearers (and readers). Each participant in the novel tests both the ideas and the lives of other
partiopants, creating a somewhat seriocomic environment. This notation of carnival is one of
bakhtin s most significant contributions to literary theory.
caraw altetlc Coined by the Russian Formalist critic Mikhail Bakhtin to describe a sense of joyful
herV' ^ r , h P ,yP^ T nov? causf b y * * watching multiple characters influence each
other with their particular understanding of truth. See carnival.
castration complex According to Sigmund Freud, if a child's sexual development is to pro-
cee normally, each must pass through the castration complex. Boys know they have a penis
like their fathers, but their mother and sisters do not. What stops th Jm a le child from having in
cestuous desires for his mother is fear of castration by his father. The child therefore, reprises
s e s s e s T mother and ^ to a woman as'his father now Pos-
S l d r e a w f t h a t vw nconsc'usly makes a successful transition to manhood. The female
d h ' hke her other' she 15 already castrated. Knowing that her father possesses
what she desires (a perns), she turns her attention away from her mother and toward her father.
After unsuccessfully attempting to seduce her father, she returns to her mother, identifies with
her, and successfully makes her transition to womanhood.
. AnaSent r ' lemen' ,ha' bu, ls not a G1ssary
305
a M * A Krm used by Aristotle in the Potties in db
^tb***1* uL.Mah its meanine is h\<>uu. -
b & d i l a"d a mligious meaning i Aristo, by ~ and f
discharge of excess e ements during s ic k n e i , ! V ^ I n T w* "' C S "h*
^ SSL.V
^ V MeienCe'Sem.i0nSW0Uld ^
Coined by Freud to describe an individuals' Bpro s a c t u a l l y ^
<, max.m.ze the pieasure sensed and d ired ^ * 1 , ic - g y, h , * f
P 'C a term used by the feminist critic Julia K n o - p e in thehuman

f^ydun drat characterizes the imaginary ,der of ^ c W c T y * ^ ^ ow , fluidity
dM. readers A term used by the New Critics fo, the kind of T ' nt *
orinriples of New C nt.c.sm to a text to arrive at an in te r p r e t wh applies the
Jd detailed reading and analysis of the text itself to derive i n " mplled m lhe term L c l ^
al, or cultural input. enve * n'eanmg wUhou.
dose reading A term used by the New Critics for the kind of read
applies the principles of New Criticism . Implied in the term is a r W r f ? lysis of a text that
the text itself (its verbal qualities) to arrive at an interpretation w i t h o u t ^ 31131x818 f
authorial, or cultural concerns. A close reading of a text became the h a llm a r k 'X 5 S' ncal
cities'
methodology. Sometimes referred to as explication de texte in French literary studies
collective m eaning A term used by the reader-oriented, subjective critic David Bleich as
as a
substitute for the word interpretation. According to Bleich, a text's meaning is developed when
a
reader works in cooperation with other readers to achieve the text's collective meaning, or its in
terpretation. Bleich argues that only when each reader is able to articulate his or her individual
responses within a group about the text can the group, working together, negotiate meaning
andarrive at the text's collective meaning.
collective un conscious A term brought into literary criticism via the psychology of Carl
Jung. The collective unconscious is that part of the psyche that contains the cumulative knowl
edge, experiences, and images of the human race. This knowledge evidences itself as "primor
dial images" in humankind's religions, myths, dreams, and literature and can be tapped by
writers through the use of archetypes.
concretized A term used by reader-oriented critics for the phenomenological process whereby
thetext registers upon the reader's consciousness. See phenomenology,
condensation A term used by Sigmund Freud in psychoanalysis and dream
designate the process whereby one compacts a feeling or emotion toward a perso g
Rectifies it into a simple sentence, phrase, or symbol.
^ o u i i . n The implied m eaning of a word, as opposed lo its diefionary defer,bon. See
c#nscious A term brought into literary criticism via the p X , . state The term was also
* ers to one of the three parts of the human psyche, a person s 8 human he See
^ by Sigmund Freud to define the rational and waking part
nal ur>conscious and collective unconscious. h d'es in Great Britain.
^ ral ^ c i s m A term used interchangeably with cultural s criticism asserts
2 E Also known as radical feminism. Thrs hjjd' ^ Ils ma,fene.: > * *
* r walily and biological differences exist between nrenan^ Accordig t o l 'r^ use
C - W w n l l y and biologically kinder and gentlerham and ce,ebra.ed bee
wm' wmen's gentler and kinder ways shoul e
s Ways are better than men's.
v* UW-vXtV t on ,p ^ 'J wilh Nuw
h , .<'' i. overtly polllicol and cultural
cultural uwitccUlUtu \\* hh *.....
.............. ......................I........... ..
. ..tnuM n.^rr . t-a-A VMUt*ve we should -
............'>** < " ' V M ..- .t b,.|"-ve we should r,.dd .. -
, 1 , , . | tire mt..W,d,.xl .anon "attain....... .. tpaln Hv dnlK > ' > exprwe ,he >he
U l r ------ *
-6
............. <\i the hvt and tlrbunk the social and ,ol.lU.l myth, c tv Mi by the bourgeois^ al
- i . . b v .!>feminist critic l-laine-*t
Showalter C()^.
_ f
s s s s s x . - i; a s s s ? . c . ..e , . . . .
and c ritic , w ho study the W o * ,
cn.tnm l stu d ie, Thcbody o f" * ' * ? N . t t American, w om en, and o th er, wh
( subaltern writer, such a , ^ f a" 5 dominant c u ltu re , These w rite r, are now ta lo n * theh
are suppressed and n-pn-ssed by their m ( |helt understanding o( reality, of society, and
place at the literary table, where they can p broad group in , three categories.
of personal sell-worth. Some scholars d.vio ^ ud,e8.
postcolonialism, Aftican-Amencan J * to describe Great Britains slowly disappear-
^ a tr o m t X d e o l o g i c a . domination of its former coionies a , the begin-
in America in 1 6 in a speech given b y lacqu es D errida a, ,ohns

plans University, this poststructural approach to literary analysis is b est considered a strafe,
gic device (or intemreting a text rather than a critical theory, school of criticism , or philosophy.
Such theories, schools of criticism, and philosophies, Derrida asserts, must identify with a body
of knowledge that they decree to be true or, at least, to contain truth. The idea that truth or a core
of metaphysical ideals can be definitely believed, articulated, and supported is exactly what
Derrida and deconstructionists wish to "deconstruct."
Considered to be the most intellectually formidable approach to literary analysis, decon
struction bases its ideas on the linguistics of Ferdinand de Saussure and his assertion that lan
guage is a system based on differences; for example, we know the difference betw een the
sounds /b/ and /p/ because we have heard both and can note the difference. Derrida enlarges
this concept of difference by declaring that how we come to know concepts is also a matter of
difference.
Denying any center of truth, such as God, humanity, or the self, deconstruction maintains
that we can never be certain about our values, beliefs, and assumptions. If this is the case, then we
can never be certain about a text's meaning, and we can, therefore, never declare a text to have but
one meaning. The "undecidability" of a text's meaning is the cardinal rule of deconstruction
deconstruction theory An approach or strategy for reading devised by the French literary
critic Jacques Lacan to discover "how" a text means bv ask in a * . c ^
structuralist critics do. Its aim is to show that what a text r\ L ,Set * cluestlons ân
me discemibly different. See d e.n n stm c^ m ^ ^ ^ Wh> Vs
defam iliarization ^ c o i n e d by the Rn.sian Formalist Victor Shklovsky. 1, is the process
Of making strange (see ostranenie) the familiar or putting the old in a new light or in a new
sphere of perception. Through poetic diction or w o r t -u "*>>" -----------
line or word, slowing down the act of perception t b ^ T ' t POCt " makeS stranSe" * e poetic
word, line, image, or any other poetic device In so d o in ^ * * * * ' * ' reeXaminC the(
their world in a new way by intensifying the act of p e ^ o n CXperience a Sma11 P3* f
denotation The dictionary definition of a word
as distinct from its connotation, or its sug-
gestive or emotional meaning.
D escnptive gram m ar A linguistic approach to the study of a language's grammar that ex
amines the structure of a la n g u a g e-its words, phrases, clauses, sentences, and so forth-as
used by the speakers of that language. Descriptive grammarians then formulate rules about the
without reference to "good" or "bad" usage. Descriptive gramma, avord,
ctul* rrectness as does prescnptrve grammar. 6 av ds
,UC'5f o e " " * f CMsO known as the aggressive instinct, this term was coined by Freud to
A rincts housed in a human s unconscious. More frequently than not, the
8*^ ctV basic in3 ' the eros or sexual instinct (later called the libido by Freud)
t\\e * * \inct attacK < ous houses our biographical memories along with suppressed
'< V >nc ^ d' theUn
t0 pA c o n f i x - R u ssian Form alists to denote the internal mechanics of a work of
d used b y th e langU age. T hese devices are an integral part of the works form.
A C i a n y it9 p 0 e tC,in e u istics to designate a process of language study in wWch Ian-
i .< n g e - f n o n -n t e r m l a,so used in otber *e,ds in which
?*
*m*g .^
ic
* ''a l. **a * *
Thc Comnm H f V life determines
determine * ^-eryday disco ihc Un-
nal;
o - laT v spirinral reality
**a W fc. . r * and col% ^ derived from any sp o( production jupmWlrtuK.
a"0rds. life and are n^ t h e a n d idcoloS1 m bv ,he
di,ertiCJ i c m i n ' " " " * Establish *h n F o r m a l . * - ^ (ofm a re _
>\ question. What

308 Glossary
* l v% i answer is thst all meaning or interpr^^^
unitving element in the universe? What then? ,rabic meanings and interpretations
***- * 7 - v r : r ,!.X -..w . by uieu,Ry, a * * * ,du:
discourse A way of seeing *nd thinking discourse refers not only to speech patterns but
cation, politics, and a variety of other **'*" ^ ' j j |cai assumptions that predispose a person to
also to a particular mindset secured by p t ,
interpret the world in a particular fashion. DSVChoanalysis to designate the process
displacement A term used by Sigmun^ re d ^ ^ ^ psyches to handle by CQn
whereby we suppress wishes and desires th j desire. Our unconscious mind may
cealing them in symbols that take the place of Xe m a dream. Y
switch, for example, a persons hatred o
double consciousness A postcolonial term used y y u f .
double-voicedness A term coined by the African-American Merary^ c n U c H ^ ^ Gates
lr., to assert that African-American literature draws upon two voic reduces the un
the black. According to Gates, this joining of the two distinct discourses p es the unique-
ness of African-American literature.
dynamic m odel The earliest of Sigmund Freud's models of the human psyche; with it, Freud
declared that our minds are based in a dichotomy consisting of the conscious (the rational) and
the unconscious (the irrational).
ecocomposition. A term coined by ecocritics in which the principles of ecocriticism are
directly applied in a composition classroom. Through journal a n d /o r memoir writing, students
develop ecosensitive human relationships. In addition, ecocomposition encourages environ
mental "life writings" by examining autobiographies through the lens of environmental con
cerns and by encouraging students themselves to write ecoaware autobiographies,
ecocriticism The most recent school of criticism to appear in literary studies, ecocriticism is
best defined by Cheryll Glotfelty in her coauthored text, The Ecocriticism Reader: "Simply put, ec
ocriticism is the study of the relationship between literature and the physical environment."
economic model Sigmund Freud's later or revised model of the human psyche, which he de
veloped after the dynamic model. In the economic model, Freud introduces two new concepts:
the pleasure principle and the reality principle.
ecofeminism (or eco-feminism) A contemporary approach in feminist studies that assumes
that patriarchal societies are relatively new and that society's original condition, known as fem
inist Eden, was matriarchal. Whereas patriarchal societies, say ecofeminists, are detrimental to
women, children, and nature, matriarchal societies protect the environment, natural resources,
and animal life while caring for women and children.
ecosphere A term used by ecocritics to highlight humanity's interconnectedness to all the
earth's living organisms and the physical environment.
ic r it u r e fe m in in e A term used in feminist criticism to refer specifically to "women's writ
ing." Modern feminist critics speculate that a style of writing peculiar to women exists and that
this ecriture fem inine is fundamentally different from the way men write and obtain meaning
through the writing process.
efferent reading A term used by Louise M. Rosenblatt in The Reader, the Text, the Poem (1978)
to refer to that type of reading in which the primary concern of the reader is with what he or
she will carry away from the reading." We read efferently, for example, when we read solely for
information, as we do when we read the directions for heating a can of soup. During this pro
cess, we are interested in only newly gained information. Efferent reading is different from
aesthetic reading, in which the reader "lives through" and experiences the reading process,
ego A term used by Sigmund Freud to designate the rational, logical, waking part of the psy
che as differentiated from the id and the superego.
Electra complex The female version of the O edipus com plex as defined by Sigmund Freud.
Freud borrows the name from Greek mythology: Electra, the sister of Orestes, aids him in killing
I
, rivtemnestra, to avenge their father, Al!, U **
f^ F r e u d , all g'ds must successfully neKof.^ '"'n o n , wh V
t0 L i o d to being a normal, mature w l
m o t h e r and recognizes that her fd,h LJke* boy " W 'ru,r'l*r,,1
* ted * u% . t h e girl realizes she is already castrated a rlv^ f t ? ? ' * *'rl '* * 2 ' *
thdt WhiCh A T i ! ' 3 Penis' *he turns f her -
J ^ C t e r the s e d u c t i o n of her father fails, she turn,.* ' dosi^ to h ^ * * krl'*""
L t ^ fhus successfully negotiating the Klectra r . Z ^ tl>Ward and aw4w ****
* * t a n e * * " l ; u s c d .b y F ,!rd in a " i d e S a u s s J , " " ***' * C ,
* * V r f l a n g u a g e s u c h a s p h o n e m e s , m o rp h e m e s, w o rd , L8" 1 " * basic
^ ' L a l e r D e v e lo p rd b y th e p la y w rig h t an d M a il ' W d 50 " U" " t>u,ld,
< f , h e e r y an d p r o d u c tio n th a t a d v o c a te s an ab an d C" c " " M t Bred,, ,,
> T d time, pla. and act,on, mcluding the assume",T m ( 'be Arisw kmd* *.
le th a l what they are seeing ,s real. Epic theater ' " * adience2l " pr of
"pi
Z tng the drama by a direct appeal to the audience^, aU' " a ' W ? ** to
"înstantly aware of the moral and social issues to w f" "P ch J r ' hs m
*, Brecht believed that dramatists should not hi , hlch "'ey are b *,. k'P" * audi.
jSan the drama and should revolt and seize the m o d 'Seois'' *
epiphany A s u d d e n u n d e r s ta n d in g o r in s ig h t, esp ecially c o n c e r n " ^ * 8 >
J o a l nature o f tr u th . T h e te rm ts o fte n u se d in its C h r is t ia n T 8 * dirt being or rh.
Bken place o n January 6 w ith th e m a n ife s ta tio n o f C h rist to t h e S i ^ EP 'P h y W
and thereafter o b s e rv e d a s a h o ly d a y m th e C h ristian C h u r c h I T " tm d n n r f i eM^
bringing this term into literary critical usage to mean a sudden ^ 1^ b resP " *
person, situation, or object. en' ^tuitive understanding of a
e p is t e m e A term borrowed from the French writer, philosopher and *, .
and used by New Histoncists to define the unifying principle or nlu M,chel Foucault
historical epoch. Through language and thought, each period in history dtjd ^ ^
ceptions about the nature of reality (or what it defines as truth) and sets Upits
b e h a v io r .
epistemological O f or relating to the branch of philosophy called epistemology, whichstud
ies the nature of knowledge, especially its limits and validity.
erasure Coined by the French deconstructionist critic Jacques Derrida to describe theprocess
of believing, i f only temporarily and for the sake of investigation, that values andbeliefsaresta
ble and are objectively true. By positing the objective existence of such values and beliefs,
Derrida declares that he can show through a deconstructive reading the absence of anydefini
tive meaning fo r these values or beliefs.

eros Another name f o r the sexual instinct, one of two basic human instincts that, accordingto
Freud, are housed in the unconscious.
e so te ric w o r k A text meant for private as opposed to public circulation.
e s s e n tia lis m The classical humanist belief that the true essence or identity^/itmeans tobe
posed o f fin ite a n d f ix e d p r o p e r t ie s th a t m a k e u p th e essentia compone a
human. E s s e n tia lis ts b e l i e v e t h a t to b e h u m a n m e a n s h av in g an unchangeable
frue and in v a r ia b le e s s e n c e . ^ language's ability to make
estrangement A t e r m u s e d b y R u s s ia n F o rm a lis ts to sh P ^ ^ word or imageand to
strange th e familiar, t h e r e b y c a u s in g th e r e a d e r s o a ex
experience it a n e w . S e e defamiliarization a n d o s tra n e n ie . tracing the historical de-
etymologically T h e a d v e r b i a l f o r m o f e ty m o lo g y , r PQTTnS/ from the word s ear it
Ve,0P m en t o f a w o r d , i n c l u d i n g i t s v a r io u s m e a n in g
Corded o c c u r r e n c e i n a l a n g u a g e to th e p r e s e n t,
exoteric treatise A t e x t m e a n t f o r g e n e r a l p u b lic
310 Glossary
reader s privilege to
expressive school Emphasizing the f t. inaividuaU.y
mdiviaua y f .ye theories of art, expressive critics
share in this individuality. Disavowing .*etoreca ^ s . Wordsworth and other mneteenth-
emphasize the subjective experience o s j cf thought
century Romantics are prime examples of this schoo ^
outside the text (e.g., historical events
extrinsic analysis The process of examining e erne
and biographies)
ana oiograpiuvs, to uncover the text's
uw .......... - meaning.
T Victor Shklovsky. According to Shklovsky, all
fabula Aterm coined by the Russian Forma 1 ^ Fabula is the raw material of the story
prose narrative is composed of either fabu a or syuz , . outlioe that contains a story's
and can be considered somewhat akin to the author s working
chronological series of events. literature comprises one complete
fall phase According to the mythic cntic North P ^ Qne of these phases is the fall
story called the monomyth, which is composedo p^ happiness and freedom to disaster
phase, which recognizes humanity s tendency to fal Pr
and bondage. , . , ,
false consciousness A term used, u by vKarl* warv
Marx to to describe
aes how the consciousness of , the
working class is shaped and controlled by the bourgeoisie. By defining what it means to be an
individual and, thereby, prescribing its class consciousness, the bourgeoisie creates a false con-
sciousness for the proletariat and perpetuates the dominant class s socia structure,
female phase The name given by the feminist critic Elaine Showalter to the present state, di
rection, and concerns of contemporary feminist criticism, usually dated from 1970 to the present,
feminine phase The name given by the feminist cntic Elaine Showalter to the first historical
period of feminist theory and criticism, dating from 1840 to 1880.
feminism An approach to textual analysis having its roots in the Progressive Era in the early
decades of the twentieth century. Some of its earliest and major philosophical tenets are articu
lated by the British feminist Virginia Woolf (A Room o f One's O w n , 1919) and the French feminist
Simone de Beauvoir (The Second Sex , 1949). Feminists assert that Western societies are patriarchal,
or controlled by men. Either consciously or unconsciously, men have oppressed women, allow-
ing themlittle or no voice in the political, social, or economic issues of their society. By not giving
voice and, therefore, value to women's opinions, responses, and writings, men have suppressed
the female, defined what it means to be feminine, and devoiced, devalued, and trivialized what
it means to be a woman. Men have made women the "nonsignificant Other."
Agoal of feminism is to change this degrading view of women so each woman will realize
that she is a valuable person, possessing the same privileges and rights as every man. Women
must define themselves and assert their own voices in politics, education, the arts, and all other
areas ot society. By debunking stereotypical images of women found throughout the literary
canon, rediscovering and publishing texts written by females but suppressed by men rereading
the canonized works of male authors from a woman's point of view, and engaging* the dis
cussion of literary theory, women can challenge the concept of male superiority and work to-
ward creating equality between the sexes. J \
B e c a u s e fe m in is m is m o re an a p p ro a ch o r m in d se t th a n a s c h o o l o f c r itic is m , fe m in is t the-
o ry an d enhosm h a v e b e e n e m b ra ce d by sc h o la rs b e lo n g in g to a v a r ie ty o f c r itic a l s c h o o ls , such
a s ; M a r x is m d e c o n s ru ctio n , p sy ch o a n a ysrs, an d N ew H is to ric is m . S o m e o f th e le a d in g tw en ti-
e th -c e n tu r y fe rm m sts a re V irg in ia W o o lf, S im o n e d e B e a u v o ir, E la in e S h o w a lte r , H elim e C ixo u s.
S a n d r a G ilb e r t, a n d G a y a tri C h a k ra v o rty S p iv a k .
feminist phase T h e n a m e g iv e n b y th e fe m in ist critic E la in e S h o w a lte r to th e se c o n d h istori-

c a l p e rio d o f fe m in is t th e o ry a n d c ritic ism , d a tin g fro m 1880 to 1920.
foregrounding Aterm used by the Russian Formalists that refers to the language of a work of
art. Literary language is different from everyday language. Unlike everyday conversation or
language, literary language shouts, "Look at me; I am special." For example, when a poet
writes, "The cow jumped over the moon," such language stands out and demands contempla
tion and analysis.
The verb form of foregrounding (.1, îry
ll
* < * < / rt" of past experiences (memrll.s)
Ibat n*
fit** 'r brj
P * rn * u * J b y th e R u s s ia n F o rm a lis ts to d e n o te the n* o
L * ^ features - o f a S u c h fe a tu r e s in c lu d e
language (see devices). A lso^m , s a m J ^ * * * ' r
l f^ ^ riricW - 't n,ean the overaU effect a text c n J T Used by thi K * o f Won7 ^
J fN ^ l the actual structure of the text along with th l? ^ th* P e r s ^ ^ ^ d ^ ' ' '
^^jiôry, alf elements of a text work together to
A wrm used ' desiBnate critics (fomiali " lfcd efco kn ^

^ d e t e r m i n e its m e a n in g . T h e te r m is o fte n a p p lied ,W h? ^ " a work' ,
* * * vv-ho in sist th a t th e in t e r p r e t a tio n o f a w o rk o f a rt m *** Russ^ n Fo L * ^ r *uc-
extrin sic e le m e n ts s u c h a s th e a u t h o r 's life o r ^ USt 7 lve from the^ 0 ? ? New
an o b ject in its o w n r ig h t th a t c a n b e a n a ly z e d wi h C n tex t For sUch S Struch"e,
Ifce or sources s u c h a s h is to r y , p o lit ic s , o r s o c io lo g y Ut referri" g to any e x Z T l * Wrk
.ist L ite r a r y t h e o r i s t a n d c r i t i c w h o em D hai extualevi-
^ i n t e r p r e t i n g a t e x t S u c h c r it ic s u s u a lly a d h e te * * and t e c h * ^
fragm entation A te r m d e v e lo p e d b y M a r x is t c ritic s to describe ,h ,

M o f sêty e a u ^ by the workers' detachment hunt
cdier. See a lie n a tio n e ffe c t. y produce and from Mch
frankfurt school, the N e o - M a r x is t c r itic s d e v o te d to developing w
Thesecritics a s s e rt th a t th e s u p e r s t r u c t u r e re fle c ts th e econ om ic b a w ^ Ma^ tprindPI -
ttxt reveals a c u ltu r e 's f r a g m e n ta t io n , n o t its w h o le n e ss. ey also believe that a
Freudian slips A te r m u s e d in p s y c h o a n a ly s is to d e scrib e accidental d , ,
Accordingto Freud, these "disguised truths" are stored in our unconscious uIS *5t0ngUe
theyslipinto our conscious minds and pop out in statements in our speech madverten%
SV Ie*hian studies Beginning in the mid-1980s, this school of criticismborrows rnd
develops the gender concerns of the feminist and gender critics and targets the heterosexual/
homosexual binary, emphasizing sexual differences. Gay studies examines sexual differences
applicable to the male, and lesbian studies, to the female. Both groups analyze thesocial struc
turesthat have defined gays and lesbians as deviant or abnormal, questioninghowsuchdefini-
toonsdeveloped throughout history and seeking to know the reasons heterosexualityhas been
sopositively defined but homosexuality has not.
gender studies A term sometimes used synonymously withfeminism; however, this fieldof
studybroadens traditional feminist criticism to include an investigation of not onlyfemaleness
but also maleness. To the multi voiced feminist theories, gender studies adds the ever-growing
andincreasingly diverse concerns of black feminists, the ongoing concerns of Frenchfeminism,
andtheimpact of poststructural theories on customary feminist issues,
good critic A term used by New Criticism to characterize the kind ofcritic
Pern's (or any text's) structure by scrutinizing its poetic elemen ft/ovemll meaning as the
tsinner tensions, and demonstrating how the poem supp
Writer re co n ciles th e s e t e n s i o n s in t o a u n ifie d w h o le . . pretation 0f language,
grammar T h e s y s te m o f r u le s th a t g o v e r n s th e production a" ^ the word ain't or say-
Inscriptive g r a m m a r r e fe r s fo m a t t e r s o f "c o rre c tn e s s , s o c h a s /d escribing how <0 '
2 Tt is I" rather than "It is me." Descriptive grammar is the pmee
I* 3 ers use th eir la n g u a g e f o r c o m m u n ic a tio n . c*ablish relationships amo g
Wc^ U n aticaI O f o r r e f e r r i n g to th e r u le s o f g ra m m a r t a
0rds or grou p s o f w o r d s .
*nUnatic a I s e n t e n c e S e e se n te n c e .
312 Glossary
rk-rrida's name for the science of writing
. ltroctionUt J*cq^}fanmes
The French deconstruct--- ^ argUes for a redefining of writing, as.
grammatology origin of languagt. curs prior to it.
.he letters of .he a.phahe,, h . -presen, ,
grapheme The symbols of a critic Elaine Showalter that has become
phoneme. the feminist scholar ^ wjth four models about the
gynocriticism Aermc Y as writers. It Pr d f ncerns of feminist criticism.
to wrempasMhe full analytic scope: btoto^caUmg ^ sh wal,er to deftne .he pnv

rtrica Atermcoined by the feminist schol ^ women's literature to develop new
5 ^ constructing "a female experience, rather than to adapt to male
models [of interpretation] based on the stu y
models and theories." See gynocnticism. Althusser to describe the process
hailing the .hj* Coined by .he Marx^cnh ^ ^ ^ interpell i. .
whereby the dominant ideology tor tQthe tragic hero's mistake or error
hamartia A term used by Aristotle in t e "missing the mark" (from the Greek
that leads to a the hero of a tragedy will commit an action or
hamartanein, to err ). Ansto P reversal of fortune.
exhibit a frailty (hamartia) t at wi e , tQthe systemof beliefs, values, and mean-
hegemony Atermused inMarxist cri 1C1S , ib Marxist critics assert that the dominant
4 which most people * X S e ^ - 1 ofSe W g S l e . 1. is the bourgeoisie who con-
culture ma given society is u According to the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci, a
given'socie.y?heêmonymay be successful but neve, complete. Rathe, than one all-
encompassing ruling class, .here usually exist several interconnected yet somewhat divergen
classes, each influencing the superstructure at different times and m different way* Marx,s.
revolutions, then, canbeginwithin alternative hegemonies rather than direct political action,
heresy of paraphrase Atermusedby NewCritics to suggest that a work of art is not equal to
its paraphrase. Apoem, for example, is not the same as its paraphrased version because the
paraphrased version will miss the poem's uniqueness, with its many connotations and various
complexities of thought.
hermeneutical principles The rules governing the interpretation of a text. See hermeneutics,
hermeneutics First defined by religious scholars as the art and science of biblical interpreta
tion, this term now refers to any theory and practice of interpretation. (From the Greek
hermeneutike, meaning the "act of interpretation.")
hermeneutics of recovery The process of investigating how a text was received and evalu
ated by its contemporary readers.
hermeneutics of suspicion The process of investigating the implied assumptionspolitical,
sexual, religious, linguistic, and so forthof a text and its author.
_
heteroglossia Literally
., interpreted
4------ "other uior \aiiitrrtf
different tongues" from the Russian word
raznorecie, this term w as coined by the R ussian Form F ormali:
alist critic M ik h a il B a k h tin to d em onstrate
the m ultiple languages that operate in any given inculturi
cu ltu re. F o r B a k h tin , all fo rm s o f so cia l speech
that people use in their daily activities con stitu te te heterc
h etero g lo ssia.
!_*.!--------- *
holistic approach An approach to literary study that
o lo m o n ic - -4-W.~ - - l! 1r lvuJl) aiuuy mat investigates, analyzes, and interprets all
elements of the artistic situation-text, author, historical context, and so on-instead of concern
trating on one or more specific aspects.
horizon of expectation. Aterm used by reader-oriented critic Hans Robert Jauss to refer to
all of a historical period s critical vocabulary and assessments of a particular text. German phe-
nomenologist Wolfgang Iser uses this same term to refer to those expectations each reader
Glossary 3^ 3
hJtt will or may or should happen next inany Riventext v ,
" C - z r * ' 's ~
V change each o( .he ho culhm, in .

j V > y CftRMbha calls hybridlly. Bhabha notes that "hybridiation i, a discoJ v e ^ 0^
V,
cit* e %tcce*s B* iveprocess having to do with the struggle around authority, author^ '
,(l>oriZ pastesand the
andrevision
fashions.of authority. It's a scxial process. It's not about person* of
^ A termused by the Russian Formalist critic Mikhail Bakhtin for the clashingof
bi-^ * * * 0 unguages in a single utterance. See heteroglossia. g
^rent la' J cooperative principle The belief that published works are worthy to be
wl*!* mre because they have been evaluated and declared literary texts by a group of
ailedllteraî people such as scholars, critics, and publishers.
v!ell'infortn J 4 by Sigmund Freud to designate the irrational, inshnctual, unknown, and un-
C
^ Aterm tof the psyche as differentiated from the ego and superego.
^pscioasPa^ ^ term devised by the narratologist Gerald Prince to differentiate among the
jjeal **a * and ideal readers. According to Prince, the ideal reader is one who explicitly and
teal, virtu3 ' stands all the nuances, terminology, and structure of a text. See virtual reader
^dreader.
andrea ^ Atermdevised by the Freudianpsychoanalyst Norman Holland, who argues
identity us receive fromour mothers a primary identity. Througheachof our life's ex-
that, atbir ^ sonaiize this identity, transforming it into our own individualized identity
periences^cbbecQmes the iens through which we see the world.
theme, aDOaratus Aterm used by the Marxist critic Louis Althusser as a synonym
f t S S J b . dominant clasps .deology.
tor Amuch-debated term in Marxist criticism, which often refers to a culture's collec-
idology^_^ consciousness (as opposed to the material reality on which experience is
tive ors tQthe culture's internal awareness of a body of laws or codes governing its
law religion, philosophy, and art to which that culture's bourgeoisie and its super
politics, asu'bscribe por Marx and Engels, a culture's ideology is more frequently than not
StrUCtU,mous with "false consciousness" because it has been defined and established by the
r l " i e and represents a set of false assumptions or illusions used by the elite to domi-
b0^ he working classes and to maintain stability. An ideology, then, may be conscious or
Elicit (inprecepts that state and shape a society's philosophy, laws, or acceptable customs),
orUmaybe a somewhat vaguer and implicit understanding of its controlling beliefs (e.g., as
inceremony). ,, ,
imarinarv order According to psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan, one of three parts of thehuman
psyche-,Contains our wishes, fantasies, and images. In this preverbal state (fromtor* to.age
sixmonths), Lacanbelieves humans are joyfully united with their mo^ '
andall comforts fromthemand relying on images as a means of Perceivl^ and ^ g
world. Inthis psychic stage of development, our image of ourselves is always in flux because
wearenot able to d ifferen tiate where one image sto p s and anot er egins. ..
implied reader Aterm devised by the German Phe" b^|"aJS^ e r 8 Aording to Iser, the
atebetweentwo kinds of readers: the implied reader an . , -d down, not by an em-
impliedreader is the reader who "embodies all those pre ispo firmly
Pinealoutside reality, but by the text itself. Hence, the implied reader has his
plantedinthe structure of the text." r^r^nnallv see in a
lpressionistic critics Critics who believe that how we feelan *laf int of viewand at
workof art arewhat really matter. Capturing what we see froma p
a
314 Glossary
* specific moment in time is whit is M ltw !l

z s z s s E x s ^ r r a ^ - - r = ,z r
makes on the artist rather than the actual representation of an o jec 1 p
inflection Used in linguistics to describe the various forms a word undergoes to mark
changes in elements such as tense, number, gender, and mood. For examp e, e e m e wor
worked signals the past tense, and the -s in the word dogs signals the p ura orm o a wor
in medias res Fromthe Latin, meaning "in the middle of things/' this term refers to a story or
narrative such as The Iliad that begins in the middle rather than at its chronological starting
point in time.
intentional fallacy Atermused by NewCritics to refer to what they believe is the erroneous
assumption that the interpretation of a literary work can be equated to the author s stated or im
plied intentions or private meanings. Claiming such external intormation to be irrelevant in as
certaining a text's meaning, NewCritics base interpretation on the text itself. The termwas first
used by William K. Wimsatt and Monroe C. Beardsley in "The Intentional Fallacy" (1946).
interpellation Also known as "hailing the subject," this termwas coined by the Marxist critic
Louis Althusser to refer to the process whereby the dominant hegemony, or prevailing ideology,
forms the attitudes of people in society.
interpretive community Aterm coined by the reader-oriented critic Stanley Fish to desig
nate a group of readers who share the same interpretive strategies.
intertextuality Aterm denoting that any given text's meaning or interpretation is related or
interrelated to the meaning of all other texts. Hence, no text can be interpreted in isolation, and
all texts are intertextual.
irony The use of words whereby a writer or speaker suggests the opposite of what is actually
stated. According to New Critics such as Cleanth Brooks, John Crowe Ransom, and I. A.
Richards, irony is the key to the "dramatic structure" of poetry and unlocks the door to show
how meaning is contained in and evolves froma poem's structure. NewCritics believe a poem's
meaning is structurally determined, created by the tension between the denotative meaning of a
poem s words and their connotations, which are, in turn, determined by the context of that par
ticular poem. Irony, then, is "an equilibrium of [these] opposing attitudes and evaluations,"
which ultimately determines the poem's meaning and is the master trope in New Criticism.
jouissance Aterm used by the psychoanalytic critic Jacques Lacan to refer to a brief moment
of joy, terror, or desire that somehow arises from deep within the unconscious psyche and re
minds us of a time of perfect wholeness when we were incapable of differentiating among im
ages from the real order. See imaginary order and symbolic order.
language Defined by the linguist Thomas Pyles as "a systematized combination of sounds that
have meaning for all people in a given cultural community." Broadly speaking, language may be
considered any system of signs or codes that convey meaning, such as road signs, the"language
of fashion (wearing different clothes in different social settings), or even the language of eating.
langue The linguistic termused by Ferdinand de Saussure to refer to the rules that comprise a
language or the structure of the language that is mastered and shared by all its speakers. By the
age of five or six, children have mastered their language's langue, although they have not mas
tered the exceptions. For example, a six-year-old may say, "1 drinked a glass of milk" and "I
climbed a tree." Having mastered his or her langue, what the child has learned is that most
English verbs form their past tense by adding -d or -ed. What the child has not mastered is the
many exceptions to this rule, in this case, the past tense of the irregular verb to drink.
latent content A term used by Sigmund Freud in psychoanalytic dream interpretation. It is
Freud's view that the ego (the rational part of the psyche) hides the true wish or latent co n te n t of
our dreams, thereby allowing the dreamer to remember a somewhat changed and often radically
different dream than the one that actually occurred.
gee j c r i t u r r f t m in in r.
,ry
*l**'*!lHnS','9,ics ' ' I'C bast; or " n>nin ,

t < fo l.,winR word h m -.............
K'Kt l,,.-151
* tn rtf lu0 -ts
n8 u 8*e A term
,crm cotncd
co' nt'd by
bV the
"'< conicmp,ir-rv
n ,rv r, * ,
-1 ^ "" 1 rchol assumptions embedded In the s.rur.,1 *. M.,nl |Uf*
P'*riarcM assr ptlr embedded in the truCre o["uniM Cr*it
and hoping to eliminate pronouns and nouns that IUeMby <*x-
h a tin g ^ #|ock or the entire vocabulary of a language. 8" wW-
^ V & $igmund Frcud in psychoanalysis that has become
Kd term u- this designation to refer to the emotional enervv th^ ynonym ou vwith
nymous îth
*s ^* . jJneica*
r i voe - i s usually directed toward some goal. thatSpnns pnm--
Pr,ngs fromprim
^t>ilogiC
'v Atertnuseda U sed to refer to something
someth.ng that has a definitebeeinnim,
definite be***--
it>
C vot life or ones worldvtew. for example, may be
' A termu worldview, for example, may be consic
consideredS ^ Aphi-
science of language and human speech, including .u '
tjug^ûre, and modification of language. 8 the study of sounds, inflec-
model A term coined by the feminist critic Elaine Showalter to h u

* for constructing a female framework for analyzing litera 1 o ? ^ "1beone^he
to* 7 3/known as gynocriticism. The linguistic model particularly a d d r ^ T 31* " 8 Vera11
" f ^ r s e . investigating the differences be,weePhow met a n d 1*<*
**2ing to Showalter. women create and write in a language peculiar to
M Hc sign A term used m linguistics in reference to words. As used p J
15 com POSed f . * Z PartS: ' he Si nifier <* " " ten or spoken mark) a n d X sig-
S (*e concept it represents). See sign. me S18
literacy experience An event that occurs when a reader and print interact,
literariness Aterm used by the Russian Formalists to refer to the language used in a workof
* Suchlanguage calls attention to itself as language, thus foregrounding itself.
literacy experience A term used by the reader-oriented critic Louise Rosenblatt to explain
W happens when a reader interacts with print. According to Rosenblatt, when a literacyex-
W3 or eVent occurs, the reader and the text transact, effectively shaping each other.
lit rary competence An internalized set of rules that govern a reader's interpretation of a
text The critic Jonathan Culler states that all readers possess literary competence, or the ability
tomake sense of a text.
literary critic One who interprets literature. This term often implies one who is an expert at
interpretinga text. Anyone, however, who reads and offers an interpretation of a text is a prac
ticingliterary critic. ,, .
literary criticism According to the nineteenth-century English critic and writer Matthew
Arnold, "a disinterested endeavor to learn and propagatethe âttempts^ study analyze,
theworld." Literary criticism is, therefore, a disciplined activity that attempts to study, analy
interpret, and evaluate works of art. . .. ra jS
literary theory A set of principles or It \
based. Our personal literary theory is our consci our expectations whenreading
încludingvalues, aesthetic sense, and morals^conêrT together the various elements
anvhmo^ i;fDratnro Rv articulating this framework and pieCjJB o ^ crgate a literary theory.
anytype of literature. By articulating t is^ body of know e g' lite r a tu r e rrefers pri-
e fe r s pn
ofImpractical criticism into a coherent, un he letter/ the wo
literature Derived from the or verse. Jacques ^ rrida ^centers."
manlyto the written word, especial y p Heconstructionis J errida ca hasiSfora
A .erm used by .be fru.hs, .be
Astern culture's proclivity for desiring or center of
Wcentrism is the belief that an ultima e
0urOughts and actions.
3 lb C U ovary
J _ i >n nsVchoanalytic dream Interpretation.
nunKtil content A term used by Sigmund Freud P ^ true wish or laten t content
Freud Argues that the ego or the rational part ot tut y ewha| changed and often radically
ot out dreams and allows the dreamer to rememoe . m ls the manifest content that
ditterent dream
uim-mu uivaui uiau than what actually
j occurred. its i
the dreamer remembers and tells his or her r*am a succcssfuUy a commodity sells,
market Aterm used by Marxist enhes to de me incipies articulated by Friedrich
Marxism An approach to literary analysis fun P primarily a literary the-
Engels and Karl Marx. Unlike other r ^ S ' ^ T political
ory hut can be used to interpret a text. It is first a set ' th<?ir world. ultimate reality, they
its followers believe will enable them to interpret and c 8 , . uuman beines exist
declare, Ls material, not spiritual. What we know beyond any
and live in social groups. To understand ourselves and our wor , we
interrelatedness of all our actions within society. Once understoo proper y, ur
cultural and our social circumstances determine who we are. What we e lev , Vaue'
and how we think are a direct result of our society, and that society, says arxism, is ui on a se
ries of ongoing conflicts between the "haves" and the "have nots.
In The Communist Manifesto (1848), Engels and Marx declare that the "haves" (the capitalists
or the bourgeoisie) have successfully enslaved the "have nots (the working class or the
proletariat) through economic policies and control of the production of goods. In addition, the
bourgeoisie have established society's beliefs, values, and art. Now the proletariat must revolt
and strip the bourgeoisie of its economic and political power and place the ownership of all
property in the hands of the government, which will fairly distribute the people's wealth.
Because the bourgeoisie controls a society's art and its literature, Marxist critics believe
they must move beyond the usual analysis of literary devices, themes, and style and concen
trate on determining an author's worldview, the historical context of the work, and the
sociological concerns of the text to see if such an analysis of the author's ideology advances
either the bourgeoisie's or the proletariat's concerns.
Some of the leading Marxist critics of the twentieth century are Georg Lukacs, Raymond
Williams, Walter Benjamin, Fredric Jameson, and Terry Eagleton.
materialist feminisms One of four major categories of contemporary feminism that empha
sizes goods and material reality. Includes critics such as Juliet Mitchell, Jacqueline Rose, and
Catherine Belsey.
metalanguage A language (words) used to describe or talk about language.
metaphor A figure of speech that directly compares two unlike objects (without using like or
as), in which the qualities of one object are ascribed to the other. For example, in the sentence
"My love is a rose," the qualities of the rose are directly ascribed to "my love."
metaphysics A term derived from Aristotle's treatise Metaphysica (350 BCE) denoting a divi
sion of philosophy that studies the nature of Being. The term implies a reality beyond what we
can see and experience with our five senses.
metaphysics of presence A term coined by the French deconstructionist Jacques Derrida to
encompass ideas such as logocentrism, phonocentrism, the operation of binary oppositions
and other notions held in Western thought and culture about the nature of language and meta
physics. Derrida's objectives are to demonstrate the shaky foundations on which such beliefs
have been established and then to thereby "deconstruct" or take apart what Western culture val
ues and to show how such a deconstructive process will lead to new and exciting interoreta-
tions of a text. * v
metatheory An overarching or all-inclusive literary theorythat is, a theory of all theories-
that can encompass all possible interpretations of a text suggested by its readers
mimesis From the Greek, meaning "imitation." Often refers to Aristotle's theory of imitation.
See mimetic theory.
<.UHMry 3l7
val formfor mimetic theory.
Adjecri
J* '* * A term used in literary criticism to w
i.~ * r v
^ ^ o f the universe. In linguistics the mimetic^ * 0 3r( ds ar>imitati
J * ^ * ^r things in the world-that is, each word h , ^ f Un g jL r C"PVof v
t^t is represented or symbolized by ,hat ^ ^ n , , ^ ^ w wd,
' ' u- accordingly a w0 rd ,^',r<>n'
^ rel,t|oair Two words that differ by one significant nh ' qUah **
< i f f " ^ ,heir Phn; me! Si8 " * " ' firs, SOU"d F
^ M Ke A term corned by the psychoanalyst Jacques F, P
development of the human psyche sometime t0 descr'be what h,
u a h 7 ha" 7 Che "* of three p , 7
** and real. D
u
n
e.toe bite, p , of develop,^, * o a* " " t f " " *
^ ^ t h a t we literally see ourselves in a mirror, and/or w ZrM?rc*er, the lm
? the ii a^ ary
i * afl a$se mother's
I*#' .iUnr'c im
imaffe.
age.Seeine
Seeingthis
thismirror
mirrorimaoo
image permits yseennr.
^ etaphoricallv our-
* 1V*^ndaries, thereby allowing us to become aware of o w s d v t h a t ' h a v e
discrete ^parate fromour mothers. as mdependent beings
7 ^ Atenn used in feminist criticismto refer toa haded or distmst womm
\ L aks According to the deconstructionist critic Jacques Derrida at Som
author loses control of language and says what was supposedly not T ma11
^ p e a k in g .- Sueh slips of the tongue usually occu, ta ^
2 strongdeclarations. By examining these slips and the binary operations that govern*em
2 ridabelieves he is able to demonstrate the undecidability of a text's meaning
modernism Aliterary movement in both England and the United States cons.dered by some
tohavebegunwith the influence of the French symbolist poetry of Charles BaudelaireandPaul
Valeryat the beginning of the twentieth century. Some assert that this period begins in 1914
*,th the start of World War I, and ends right after World War II; still others mark its ending
around1965. . . . , , ,
However its span is dated, modernism is marked, as T. S. Eliot notes, by an impersonal
viewofhumanityand produced a literature that is distinctly antiromantic andantiexpressionis-
tic. Initsardent search for meaning through form, modernismtypically uses hard, dry language
thatasserts that feelings and emotions are elicited by the text itself throughthe textual arrange
mentofits images. By rejecting a merely personal reading of a work, modernismdeclares that a
text'smeaning can be found by examining its structure, a technique that is especially true for
poetry. The modernist period provides literary criticism with a formal explanation for howa
poemoranyother work of literature achieves or produces meaning through its form,
modernity Atermused synonymously with the Enlightenment or Age of Reason (eighteenth
century) by many critics who hold to two basic premises: a belief that reason is humankind's
bestguidetolife and that science can lead humanity to a new promised land,
monomyth Atermused in the archetypal criticismof Northrop Frye, who states that all liter
aturecomprises one complete and whole story called the monomyth. This monomyth can est
k diagrammedas a circle containing four separate phases, with each phase correspon ing toa
seasonof the year and to peculiar cycles of human experiences. The phases are romance
summer story of total happiness and wish fulfillment), antiromance (the ^rlI*l*er ^
^Hdage, imprisonment, frustration, and fear), comedy (the spring story t a e s o
* * Nation to freedom and happiness), and tragedy (the fall
haPPmess todisaster). According to Frye, all stories fall somewhere within these g
n>hne Used in linguistics to describe the smallest part of a word tha has *eîca g he
îficance. For example, whereas the word dog contains one morpheme, g!
dogs contains two morphemes, (dog) and {-s). , rnmnound
Used in linguistics to desCTibethe process of word formation, such as compoun
dsandinflections.
MH Glossary
. C taUi\v Uvi-Strau that refers to the
m ythtnifi A term coined by the structuralist ^ myth# Ihcw>basic structures,
many recurrent theme's running through humankma _ th, primary building blocks of
he maintains, are similar to the individual sounds * ^ and through their relationships
language itself, l ike these sounds, mythemes lino m lZ
b v llu ^ lhe mpaning
meaning of any individual myth
within the mythic structure, not in their oven ini found within the story,
depends on the interaction and order of the myt tm ^ archetypal patterns to explain the
mythic criticism Criticism that examines archetypes a esDecially emphasized by Carl
structure and significance of texts. This type of criticism was esp y
Jung and Northrop Frye. See archetypal criticism. . . r rald prinCe to refer to the person to
narratee Atermusedby the structuralist and t u r n ^ narratee is not the actual person
whomthe narrator of a text is speaking. It is Pnnce s v
reading the text but, in fact, is produced by the narrative itseli.
narrateme A term synonymous with narrative function. w
narrative functions According to the Russian narratologist Vladimir Pr P P ' * " [ * r
tales are composed of a sequence of thirty-one fixed elements, or narrative occur
in the same order in all fairy tales. Each function identifies predictable patterns that central char-
acters will enact to further the plot of the story.
narratologist Aparticular kind of structuralist who uses the principles of narratology to in
terpret texts.
narratology A form of structuralism espoused by Gerald Prince, Vladimir Propp, Tzvetan
Todorov, Roland Barthes, and Gerard Genette that illustrates how a story s meaning develops
fromits overall structure (its langue) rather than fromeach individual story s isolated theme. To
ascertain a text's meaning, narratologists emphasize grammatical elements such as verb tenses
and the relationships and configurations of figures of speech within the story,
naturalism Aterm that refers to the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century view of life
that emphasizes the importance of scientific thought and determinism in literary study. Anatu
ralistic critic views humans as animals who respond in deterministic ways to their environ
ments and internal drives.
neoplatonic Aterm used to describe any philosophical system that closely resembles that es
tablished by Plato, thus the prefix neo, meaning "new." The term originated in the third century
in Alexandria in a philosophical system that mixed Asian, Platonic, and Christian beliefs.
neurosis Anervous disorder that has no known bodily or physical cause that can lead to a va
riety of physical and psychological abnormalities.
New Criticism Aloosely structured school of criticism that dominated American literary crit-
icism from the early 1930s to the 1960s. Named after John Crowe Ransom's 1941 book The New
Criticism , the theory is based on the view that a work of art or a text is a concrete object that can,
like any other concrete object, be analyzed to discover its meaning independent of its author's
intention or the emotional state or values of either its author or reader. For New Critics a
poem's meaning must reside within its own structure (in NewCriticism, the word poem refers'to
any text, not only a poem). By giving a poem a close reading, the New Critics believe they can
determine a text's correct meaning. J
Often referred to as "the text and text alone" approach to literary analysis, NewCriticismhas
found many practitioners, such as John Crowe Ransom, Ren Wellek W K Wimsatt R P
Blackmur I A. Richards Cleanth Brooks, and Robert Penn Warren. With'the publication of
Brooks and Warren s 1938 college text Understanding Poetry, NewCriticismbecame the dominant
approach to textual analysis until the 1960s.
New Critics Critics who use the doctrines, assumptions, and methodology of New Criticism
in their literary analysis.
New Historicism The American branch of Cultural Poetics. Appearing in the late 1970s and
early 1980s, New Historicismis one of the most recent approaches to textual analysis. Ledbysuch
Îf
\ owwMontrose. Now \UMwUUm ,W ",M hwif-.
mrv though. which d e c W thathistory *-tv
^cura to view of what tvMiy txcm m t. m ttu,um , t
*\sistcot worWvWw of any \m>yW, country, iw n
ftotr^ ' Uy C ' ' xUhistory i subjective,historian* can wvw yrovwi* u* vat,
*' / *"' <c;* ^ ja'^ ta n * '* ' , tetMtv of p*t event* ot Ihr worldview ni y*-.^.w SumU,
W " '* * f;ci> '" , mv *cCU? ' !,w t\icoume, or ways of viewing tire world tty v **n ,*
*' V'K > i'^ \ o S *U'l .t OUC n'* ; ourHo that directly affect the interpretation .*<t*.t,
* ct f 1' torv 1 . i^ o o rtau t c provides its follower* with a practice of titer
tfi^ 'V '" o f ^ ver;'\ h a t ^ 'r r e d n e s s o f a\\ hum an activities, admits its own preywti
V
/r^V
' . K^*i >aches.
1" .1-"n1e 's . ._
** ''moricisn,''"" prMit
*<o* 4 \ts to the multiple approaches to textual analv .......... ^ W
* dbe?x\l this approach Cultural Poetics, e m p h a s iz in g ^ in New H i* .
10 " ine a text's meaning. Its British counterpart isln d ntin* the mult P| eT *
* ? . A school of twentie.h-cen.ury Z n e Z ^ U ^ * * ^
s<* BU f art Declaring that human experience is basical,,L ^ Cntlcs wh value
shOUld be baSed n lhe m ral Valuese x h i b i t s t a ! ; ^ Crita " w S ' S
**** ' He The complexities of the objective worldits cultural ^ .
* * * L a s detailed by an individual or class of writers. ' ' rell8 10us' and pollt,Cal
Aterm that refers to the subjective qualities of authors as exhibited ina *
^nolyphonic novels A term coined by the Russian critic Mikhail Bakhtin Wnbn8*-
*n^s jnwhich their authors know the ending of the novel when they fSt beL'tT T
^ itself. In such novels, the writer knows all the characters' actions and chTes Z t ^
^'work's entire structure. In addition, the author's understanding of truth is exhibited
ûghout the text. See polyphonic novels.
Jnective correlative A term coined by T. S. Eliot that refers to a set of objects, a situation, a
events, or reactions that can serve to awaken in the reader the emotional responsethat the
Cj^hordesires without being a direct statement of that emotion.
frheorv o f art A term introduced by M. H. Abrams that declares that the literary
objective ^ ^ Every work of art is a public text that can be understoodbyapplyingthe
^dards of public discourse, not the private experience, intentions, and vocabulary of its au-
ust^d by
" I Z T ^ Z T e ^ s , and our own speech sounds, and Ihey become k* -
ssmboisof lack that will plague us our entire , 0f c.,(|d development, all children
Oedipus complex According to Sigmund Freu O h towarel Ae pamntrf *
ta . L the ages of three and six develop , or t o ^ kx b o y s . h h . s ~ do
oppositesex and hostile feelings toward the p 0 edipus, who murdc^ h la
M*uscomplex, named after the Pec.ra complex "f ^ o v e r
marriedhis mother. In girls this p e n o d ,s.called th<^ mothw and her mother si ^
Electra, who avenged her father's death byk
lHing er , m aBty^W 5 ^
One, the The term used by Plato
possesses ontological status, existing whether any m The
It iscom posed of three elements: absolute beauty, by NtfwCn
definedseveral hundred years later by 1 existence. The terI^! at n.allyexists)jn
ontological Relating to or based on a concrete entit^janjng.
Cognition of their belief that a work of a asCertain its m
âlyzed and dissected like any other o je
i0
i<
'/
320 Gloamary
ontological critic Acritic whouw* the.sumption, of NowCriticismandbelieves that atext

Ta umc" emuy - l o a pinllng. vase, or dex.r lock-tha. can be analyzed to ascertain its I
' ,*.
V'
V
- - - - - - 4 V
sucking our thumbs and, still later, ^ s,n _ a ^ 9lructur, is simiiar to a living pUnt, h
organic unity Atermdesen ing 1P complex interrelationship. First advancedby k
withall its parts suPPorhngeachother and lw 8 * h concept of the organic unity of a h
the nineteenth-century support "he text's centra, .deader *
workof art declares that each par Daradox. No part of a text is superfluous, but similar
the NewCritics wouldcall it, thewor P whoie. The whole is, therefore, greater than
to a living organism, each part serves to enhan
thesumof its parts. theory bv Edward Said that refers to the cre-
:
Orientalism Atermintroduced ^ f AsianS/ are indolent, thought-
ation of non-European stereotypes that suggest Orientals, or S'
less, sexually immoral, unreliable, and demented.
...____ Atermused by Russian Formalists that translates as making Strang* Through
t T * rhyme1 other litemry devices, poetic diction or % %
strange" familiar words, thereby causing readers to reexamine and expenence afresh word,
image, or symbol. See defamiliarization.
Other Atermused in feminist criticism(the "not-male" and thus unimportant) and postcolo
nialism(the colonized) to mean "different from" and unimportant, that which is dominated,
paradox Atermused by the NewCritics (especially Cleanth Brooks) to help explain the na-
Eire and essence of poetry. According to Brooks, scientific language must be precise and exact.
On the other hand, poetry's chief characteristic is its many rich connotations, not the scientific
denotations of words. The meaning of a poemis, therefore, built on paradox, a juxtaposition of
connotations and meanings that all support the poem's central idea. Language, assert the New
Critics, is complex and can sustain multiple meanings. According to Brooks, the language of
poetry is the language of paradox."
parapraxes Atermcoined by Sigmund Freud for slips of tongue, failures of memory, acts of
misplacing an object, and other so-called mistakes we make, all of which can be directly traced
to our unconscious desires, wishes, or intentions.
parole Alinguistic termused by Ferdinand de Saussure and others to refer to an individual's
actual speech utterances, as opposed to langue, the rules that comprise a language. An individ
ual cangenerate countless examples of parole, but all are governed by the language's structure,
its langue. For Saussure and other linguists, the proper study of linguistics is the systemthe
languenot parole.
patriarchal Atermused by feminist critics and others to describe a society or culture domi
nated by men; the adjective formof patriarchy.
patriarchy Asocietal or social organization in which men hold a disproportionate amount of
power. In such a society, men define what it means to be human, including what it means to be
female.
penis envy According to Sigmund Freud, the unfulfilled desire all women have for a
penis; this desire causes them to possess a sense of lack throughout their lives. See Electra
complex.
personal conscious Atermused in psychoanalytic criticism to refer to the part of the human
psyche that directly perceives and interacts with the external world. It is sometimes referred to
as the waking state because the personal conscious is the image or thought of which we are aware
at any given moment.
rV .121
U Jjrfb# t >* tH'rson,,!
ious live*,
any
A figure of speech that attributes human 9ualities to animals,
'Vl"'
Frf^M as' r inani-
,l.g * The f ! S,aRe f "h| ld
. ., i ,^ v i u d e s ir e o r lib id o ic
duyelopment
*
as theorized
II Q
* * * & * * xual d ire r Hbido U dircc,;id 'W r t 'I C e n 'ii ^ Slsmu" d Freud. In
>tê||it symbol A term used in psychoanal SenitaU. ...........
* f " L PeniS' ike " V % ",en8th h * exceedc
descr*be the, malt
maVs symb0J of
P , a sword, a knife, or a pen exceeds its Jdiamet
R/nv-, err such as a
phtfoctntric A term used to describe anv ,
bvmenand, thus, governed by a male way 0f ^ L fcriticm, phi]0sn k
piuttocentrism The belief that thephal,s ^ th" P * r ""O' doWnated
âccom panied by male-centered, male-dorn7n ! Urce of Power in ^ i
^ i<ip3s) the h IpPreSe,a,|<^ ^ l'^ e IperbstI5atrâr^1^^^^FFbons1^ l*terafure; usu-
Lacan
' 'he Pha" US --- --- smtied and the ulHrJl(eg
8/JaC(1Ues
,
1ornate
newer. A lthou gh n e ith e r m a l e s n o r f e m a le s c a n e v e r p o s s e s s " t h e ^ i i ^ UinJm ate svmhni
s> bo1 of
never be com p lete o r w h o le , m a le s d o h a v e a p e n is a n d s o h a v e a s l i g h t c S m t o ' sS T '
phenomenology Founded by Edmund Husserl, a modern philosophical tendencv Z T
phasizes the perceiver. Objects exist and achieve meaning if and only if we register themn
consciousness. Phenomenological critics are concerned with the ways that our conscTousnZ
perceives works of art.
philologist The name given to a linguist before the mid-twentieth century. Aphilologist is
onewho describes, compares, and analyzes the languages of the world to discover their simi-
laritiesand relationships.
philology The science of linguistics before the mid-twentieth century; in current usage, the
termrefers to historical and comparative linguistics. Typically, whereas philology approached
the study of language diachronically, present-day linguistics uses both the diachronic and
synchronic approaches.
phoneme A linguistic term for the smallest distinct and significant sounds that comprise a
language. Phonemes are the primary building blocks of language. American English, for exam
ple, contains approximately forty-five phonemes, such as /p/, /b/, and /k/.
phonetically The adverbial form of phonetics.
phonetics The study of how sounds are classified, described, and transcribed within a partic
ularlanguage.
phonocentrism A term coined by the French deconstructionist Jacques Derrida that asserts
that Westernculture privileges or prefers speech over writing. See privileged.
Phonologically The adverbial form of phonology.
Phonology The study of the various sound changes in a word or a particular language, o
Eludingthe study of phonetics. , . nsvche
^*a*ure Principle Introduced by Sigmund Freud in his economic m e instantaneous
sah f efinedaSthat part o ( the human psyche that craves on y p eaS,UP. estat,jjShed bysociety.
actionof instinctual drives. It ignores moral and sexua oun a new interpretation
Atermused by Louise M. Rosenblatt that refers to h e of countless rereading*
ofth mea reader transacts with a text, whether it is a firstreadl g h YNewCritics g en erally
Z text- interpretation becomes the poem, the new creation. N
^ * is termto refer to any literary work.
322 Glossary
P oetics Written by Aristotle, the earliest known work containing a definition of literature
particularly the genre of tragedy.
poetics Aterm used by the Russian Formalists to mean an analysis of a literary work's con
stituent parts, including all its linguistic and structural features. See form.
p o e t ikes The Greek word meaning "things that are made or crafted. In critical theory, this
word refers to Aristotle's text Poetics, which contains the components or crafted parts" of a
tragedy.
political unconscious A term coined by the Marxist critic Fredric Jameson. Borrowing
Freud's idea of a repressed unconscious, Jameson posits the existence of apolitical unconscious,
or repressed conditions of exploitation and oppression. The function of literary analysis,
Jameson declares, is to uncover the political unconscious present in a text,
polyphonic novel Atermcoined by the Russian critic Mikhail Bakhtin to describe thosenov
els for which their authors had no prescribed outcome or overall structural outline before writ
ing the texts. The "truth" that the novel expresses is an active creation in the consciousness of
the author, the reader, andthecharacters interactingas equal participants. For Bakhtin, the truth
or worth of a polyphonic novel requires a plurality of consciousnesses; it is not solely the work
ing out of the author's worldview. See nonpolyphonic novel.
postcolonial criticism Criticismthat investigates ways that texts bear traces of colonialism's
ideology and interpret such texts as challenging or promoting the colonizer s purposes and
hegemony. Those who engage in this type of criticismanalyze canonical texts fromcolonizing
countries.
postcolonial feminism Atype of feminist criticismthat embraces the theories and practices of
postcolonialism. Postcolonial feminismrejects the phallocentric, patriarchal systemestablishedby
white males and recognizes that it is engaged in a political and social struggle against male domi
nance. Postcolonial feminists likenthemselves to colonized subjects who are definedby the "male
gaze" andare thus reducedtostereotypes andsubjected tothe long-lastingsocial andeconomicef
fects of colonialism. These critics reject the termwoman, believing that such usage defines females
by only their sex.
postcolonialism or post-colonialism Oneof the most recent approaches toliteraryanalysis to
appearontheliteraryscene. Postcolonialismconcerns itselfwithliteraturewritteninEnglishinfor
merlycolonizedcountries suchasAustralia, NewZealand, Africa, andSouthAmerica, whichwere
once dominated by but remained outside of the white, European males' cultural, political, and
philosophical tradition. Postcolonialismusuallyexcludes Literaturethat represents either Britishor
Americanviewpoints.
Often referred to as "third-world literature" by Marxist criticsa term many other critics
think pejorativepostcolonialisminvestigates what happens when two cultures clash and one
of them, with its accompanying ideology, empowers and deems itself superior to the other.
Postcolonial theorists include Fredric Jameson, Georg Gugelberger, Edward W. Said, Bill
Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, Helen Tiffin, Frantz Fanon, Ian Adam, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak,
Homi K. Bhabha, andothers.
postcolonial theory Astrain of postcolonial criticism that moves beyond the bounds of lit
erary studies and investigates social, political, and economic concerns of the colonized and the
colonizer.
postist critics Critics who come after structuralism, such as postmodernists, poststructuralists,
and postcolonialists.
postmodern feminisms One of four categories of contemporary feminist theory dating from
1990 to the present; includes theorists and critics such as Jane Gallop, Judith Butler, Uma
Narayan, and Mary Daly.
postmodernism Aterm often used synonymously with deconstruction and poststructural
ism. First used inliterary circles inthe 1930s, the termgained inpopularity during the late 1960s
19/Os. Presently it connotes a ,,r <1,'Mr
-. rs thJt denies the existence . "P <>f pl.ii
litinary cttMcft.
* ' '*' * **dl '"'iWd.wl-, ,n<*nt r- f-tr *,. ** vx%. **n<|
stxrirtl or ,h*^ think
< ? Ah'm w w t o . v .ri v' : ; r up- .......
structuralism. Dating from thr ^ lh,n<_ .......
of thought as feminism, psych much brn.^,* '""t-
structuralism ^ ^ - - C
- * r :s s r - S t a s * - -
^decidability of a text's meaning and w ,ructuraiists ^ " v e method^'- 'oc-
Poststructuralists alSo n,dedare th^t a tex?* the the7L" method(>i( -
j^-tive reality.
,Wvedin both reading and writing anI ? 10n the i0 n *, ^ not iri a/ ?nd' o/ten y ar>d ar.
UrworkTofc art.
f***-~ r
^ Practical -------
critics often define -- aiiu tenets
standards ofand
of taste theoretical
wKi- criticism
^liucismto
toaaparticu-
particv
^rular text. and explain, evaluate, orjustify
P ^ c a l criticism See applied criticism.
-conscious A term used by Sigmund Freud in his typographical mot-W ^ u
5 Uto refer to the part of the psyche that is the storehouse of memories and whirh^ 11 PSy
part of the mind allows to be brought to consciousness without disguise in some otheZZf
Thesememories are manageable m the consciousness without "masking."
prescriptive gram m ar Rules sanctioned or authorized by grammarians who believe edu
catedpeople should speak and write in the correct way (i.e., the correct wayspecificallydefined
bythese grammarians).
private symbol See symbol.
privileged A term introduced into literary criticism by the French deconstructionist Jacques
Derrida. According to Derrida, Western society bases its values and metaphysical assump
tions on opposites, such as good/bad, light/dark, and true/false. In each of these pairs,
Derrida asserts, Western culture values or p r iv ile g e s the first element and devalues or
unprivileges the second.
production t h e o r y A te r m d e v e lo p e d b y th e M a rx is t critic L ou is A lthusser lhat r e je c t s ^ a s
sumption o f reflection theory th a t th e superstructure m u st directly reflect the ^
asserts that lite ra tu re s h o u ld n o t b e s tr ic tly re le g a te d to th e su perstru ctu re; furthermore,
iieves that the s u p e r s tr u c tu r e c a n a n d d o e s in flu e n c e th e b ase. ,. . 1. , . id sod-
p roletariat A term u s e d b y K a r l M a r x a n d F rie d rich E n g els to refer re me
ety. According to M a r x is t th e o ry , th e bourgeoisie (o r upper c as jy ,e bourgeoisie, not the
lariat by controlling the economic policies and the produc 10 g
Proletariat, defines and articulates a society s ideology. oetry, such as rhythm, meter,
Proso<*y The mechanical or structural elements that c P us|ywith versification.
tyme, stanza, diction, alliteration, and so forth. Used sy y emoti0nal and psycholog-
P*ychoanalysi A method first used by Sigmund has the patient talk freely
J*1^^ders. During this type of therapy, the psyc hoanaly-
0r her childhood experiences and dreams. Sigmund Freud 5 ^^
c r i t i c ! The application of
înterpreting works of literature. Because developing*naes
P ain the hows and whys of human actions vvi
324 Glossary , New Historicism use psychoanalyse
V. irvism feminism, and . oretiCal assumptions.
of crtflcal * * ,U* "^withoui violating thou own >#arlists arc neurotic. Unlike
methods intheir " f Seismis Freud's ss" Panitetations and results of neurosts
Central topsychoanalytic of the outward m ^ wholeness.
other neurotics, the artist esc P ^ yhvvayback to ^ ne or fantasy. A text, then, can be
by finding inthe act of cmat J f is really an arhst s d d wish. Just as if he were
Freud believes that a l that the dream is ^ wish as lt evidences it*
analyzed like a drca"\F to uncover the meaning * J d ^ ethodology of psychoanaly-
Northrop Frye, and Jacques Lacan, have revise

their ownmethodologies for literary analysis. inist criticism devised by Elaine
psychoanalytic model One of four approach^ ^ a femaie framework for the
Showalter under the umbrella name the female psyche and demonstrates how
analysis of women's literature. This model ana'>, the flux and fluidity of female writing
suchan analysis affects the writing process, emphasizing
as opposedtomale writing s ngidity andstruc use biographical data of an author
psychobiography Amethod of m* f ^ ^ 8ltures and other sources to construct the au-
gained through biographies, personal letters, Jectares^ neuroses,
thor's personality, with all its idiosyncrasies, internal and external coni
public symbol See symbol.
t h e y One of the most recent schools of literary criticism (1991-present), rt questions
the terms we use to describe ourselves such as heterosexual or homosexual. Such words, claims
queer theory, are socially constructed and do not define who we are. Disavowing essentialism
andembracing social constructivism, queer theory assumes that our personal identities are un
stable andin constant flux. As Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, one of queer theory's leading theorists,
declares, "All people are different." What it means tobe male or female is always in flux. Queer
theory challenges the assumptions of sexual identity, gender, and sexual difference, maintaining
that our identities are connected to what we do and who we are, not to our supposed essence.
Our identities are not the cause of our performances. Who we are is performative; that is, what
we ourselves declare ourselves tobe.
race Used in postcolonial theory to refer to a class of people based on physical and cultural
distinctions.
reader-oriented criticism Rising to prominence in literary analysis in the early 1970s
reader-oriented criticismasserts that the reader is active, not passive, during the reading pro
cess. Both the reader and the text transact and share a transactional experience: The text f c l as
a snmo'us for ehciting various experiences, thoughts, and ideas of the reader those found !n
both real life and reading experiences. Simultaneously, the text shapes the read
selecting, limiting, and orderingthe ideas that best conformto the text ^ e r H e>? ? * a a *
hon is a newcreationcalled a poem For reader orient u ^ r e s u lt m 8 ^terpreta-
the poembeing another name to, the texts interpretation'orm^tag
----- meaning + POem
text? W*hoiTtheêader? D^Tt^reader ot thetext^ * qUeStk 'SUCh3S' Wh3t * 3

text's interpretation? What part does the author nlav COI?bmatlon of both determine the
most important, What is ^reading process? P Y m 3 WOrk s êrpretation? and perhaps
differe" ' o' 'he -ding

S T * "
consists of the physical worldînduînt^ho 6 ftage f Psychic development, which
a, including the material universe and everything in it. It also
G,(*sary
u Hies everything a person is n ot m , 325
#k><(Prin'ordidt
lack' ,eadinthe p
' A ferm devised s y c f c^8 ^ m a n * **** ord
narr
ft*1 ^ J s of readersreal, virtu al anH 'Qt^0gist r n' e r cm .n
^ , r the , ^ P Ce /U^,
j,deal reader. Person a c f ^ then*rra t* d i f f e r ^ ,. >n a
i s S Sthefreai"r
J 5 SKS- rM- -------
b ~ * *numan
r~-----me * p s y c h e T' ' nunpsvch,
p aeS ^ - H* P ^ P i ^ o S " 1^ 'h e n e e d for !* < .
Lie * ch^ s desire *v-
for rpleasure. See pleasure aprinciple.
---- standards and regulations
WK, n e f^ H - a ~C *_ . ..
an3* aesthetics Another term for affective stylistics.
^ I hoo - 11CpH hi/ rP^Hor^rwtnl._1
Aterm ---------
^ theory A used by reader-oriented critics to di
i * * * ! are applied to textual analysis. A text's meaning, t h e ^ u e * * * theore* a l as-
present reader's personal response and from a critical e x a m S ! 1? J 6 derived both
from P ^ text through time, including contemporary critics of the a ?uf * * history of the
jiving at the present moment. e authr of the text in ad-
In linguistics, the entity-object, state of affairs, and so forth-in u,
% * * * ? or symbolized by a word or form. For examp,*. the r e l e r e n ^ X ^ d S
c the object desk.
L d h . th -'X " e , * e rhes, Iheories developed by Marxist critics to explain dw
SUp S " ^ 2 ^ * h SUpere,rUC,Urc' A PosiHon held by Kar, Marx earlyt
career, Ibis Iheory asserts that the base or economic structure of society directly affects Ld
Lroines a society's values; social, political, educational, and legal institutions; art; and
beliefsor- taken collectively, what Marx calls a society's superstructure. Simply put, the
rstructure reflects or mirrors the base. Although a few Marxist critics still hold to this posi
tion most now assert that the relationship between the base and the superstructure is much
morecomplex than originally believed. The term vulgar Marxism is used to describe the form
ofMarxismthat still holds to the reflection theory,
reflectionism See reflection theory.
relativism The belief held by some literary critics that a text has an infinite number of valid
interpretations.
relativistic critic Critic who uses various and even contradictory theories in critiquing a
workofart.
rhetoric Often defined as the art of speaking and writing effectively. Founded ^ Greeceby
CoraxofSyracuse in the fifth century BCE, rhetoric set forth the pnnc.pfesandrules^compos.
tionforspeech. Today the term is used by such critics as Kenneth
Barthes, andJacques Derrida and refers to patterns of structure oun w
Hiebasisfor much modem criticism. . writers
rhetorical criticism A form of criticism that emphasizes the^^cdved ways, emphasizing
^ tomanipulate readers to interpret the writers' works in preconceived ways, P
***artandtechniques of persuasion. critic, to explain the one
ronuncePhase One of four phases used by Northrop F*ê' * the romance phase is
completeor whole story of literature, the monomyth, n e total happiness.
summer" story when all our wishes are fulfilled an we vVilliam Wordsworth
anTc nticism A literary movement that dates t o t h e ction against the eighteenth^
Samuel Taylor Coleridge's L y rical B allad s in 1798. As to , living P -" ';'
2 * ? AS' >âson. Romanticism asserts that the worldI ^ lnlth, Romanticsrt de-
clare?hatbeCmin8/ and asPirin8 * denying r e a s o n as1 of themselves an * * chtoa
tadivi? ,Intuition can lead them to an understand g b lued.A* an app
dual concerns, the emotions, and the imagination are to
i
326 Glossary
text. Romanticism concerns itself with the artist's feelings and attitudes exhibited within the
Using the principles of science, the Russian Formalists believed that to study a literary work
is to study its literariness, or the language used in the text. Unlike everyday speech, literary lan
guage foregrounds itself, shouting, "Look at me; I am special." Through structure, imagery,
syntax, and a host of other literary devices, literary language has the capacity to make strange
ordinary words, putting them in a new light, a process called defamiliarization. Such
estrangement causes readers toslowdown their perceptionof the word or image and experience
afresh that word or image.
Because the Russian Formalists were not willing to view literature through the Stalinist
regime's political and ideological perspectives, the former Soviet government disbanded their
literary groups. Their influence flourished in the former Czechoslovakia in the writings of the
Prague Linguistic Circle and indirectly influenced Anglo-American NewCriticism,
sadistic-anal phase Another termfor Freud's anal stage in a child's development,
schools of criticism Agroup of critics who share common concerns about reading, writing,
and interpretation. Examples of such schools are New Criticism, reader-oriented criticism,
structuralism, deconstruction, NewHistoricism, and ecocriticism.
semanalysis Anewscience developed by the psychoanalytic critic Julia Kristeva, who believes
that during the Lacanianpremirror stage of development, a child experiences a lack or separation
fromthe mother, who shapes meaning andgives significance, moving fromthis lack to desire. An
emotional force tied toour instincts, called semiotique, develops. Using these ideas, Kristeva ex
plores howsignificationor meaning continues to develop throughout our entire lives,
semantic features Used in linguistics to refer to those properties of words that help identify
the different shades of meaning and relationships a word may have to surrounding phrases,
clauses, and sentences.
semantics Used in linguistics to denote the study of how words combine to make meaning
within a language.
semiology Proposed by the structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure, this new science would
study how we create meaning through signs or codes in all our social behavioral systems.
Because language was the chief and most characteristic of these systems, Saussure declared that
it was to be the main branch of this newscience. Although semiology never became the impor
tant newscience Saussure envisioned, a similar science, semiotics, did develop and is still prac-
ticed today.
scmiotic interpretation Areading of signs to determine a text's intemretati rwinned
that allow it to operate. Because it ossa. Gl
** often used interv-k,___f^ploy;
* * % ' are f Z
* * UT d ^ ^ h a n g e a b lT ;^ mhods 3
^ Tar field of study, structuralism is more an * * H'veVer ^ Lby stnictur .
L e e A group of words that expresses ^P" Mch >ol i t e ^ - e n u ^ *"
(" ...tactic structures of a language. mPlel thouEht > de" a
"forms to
f 0te**c contemporary feminist criticism that advocates separation from "restsb-
, tin*s,n A J ,ccUmes that women must first see themselves in a diff
mi,
,0r*T
2
15 *h e n e c e s s a r y " theX
in d iv id u a lity .SUC" 3 SePa' a' ,0n 'S
Afferent
ste P <o act, vdiSC0Ver wf
8 jfirwti""* Another name toreros, one of two bx ...... ' Vl" P'rsonsl
v e r y " " ' s u n c o n s c io u s . L a t e r in h i s c a r e e r , F te u d r e f e ^ " ' ' 5 Freud a s s e t* a
L a i p o litic . A ,c r m in t r o d u c e d b y K a te M ille t! w ith " " s t e r n as lib id a " P *
* becom e s y n o n y m o u s w ith th e s e c o n d w a v e o f f e r n i t u l ^ ' W ' i ( l W ) Th ,
L a l i t y and id e o lo g ic a l in d o c t r in a t io n h a v e b e e n th e c h j Wh,Ch that L L
S p a t r i a r c h y a , th e c e n t e r o f t h e fe m in is t n T e m ^ ' o p S ' T
distinctions b e tw e e n s e x a n d g e n d e r , th e firs t b e in g ^ f ' 'orm alsod
al Conforming o r n o t c o n f o r m in g to p r e s c r ib e d c u ltu r a lle x m l dL " " be * Psychologi
L of w h at M ille t d u b s s e x u a l p o litic s . * * r les d in a ,ed by society
P The term h a s a ls o b e e n u s e d b y A n n e tte K o lo d n y to assert that f
a pluralistic a p p r o a c h to lite r a r y c r itic is m . K o lo d n y a ssu m es that a n ! " m tics must accept
bUity of m an y d iffe r e n t r e a d in g s ; s u c h a n a p p ro a c h , sh e argues, is both ^ ^
sign A lin g u istic s te rm fir s t u s e d b y th e F re n c h stru ctu ralist Ferdinand de s , Ummatm8'
thedefinition fo r a w o rd . F o r S a u s s u r e , a w o rd rep resen ts an abstract concept n S T J f
the objective w o rld o r a s y m b o l th a t s u p p o s e d ly e q u a ls som ethin g else A X d is a
thing that h as m e a n in g ) c o m p o s e d o f b o th a signifier and a signified. ^ (s me'
signification A term used in literary criticism, theories of reading, and linguistics to denote
theprocess by which we arrive at meaning through linguistic signs or other symbolic means.
signified A term used by the French structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure that denotes one part
of a word. Saussure proposed that all words are actually signs composed of two parts: the
signifier and the signified. The signified is the concept to which the signifiera writtenor spoken
wordor soundrefers. Similar to the two sides of a sheet of paper, the linguistic sign is the union
of the signifier and the signified.
signifier Aterm used by the French structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure that denotes onepart
of a word. The signifier is the spoken or written constituent, such as the sound /1/and the or
thographic (written) symbol t See signified and sign.
simile A figure of speech that compares two unlike objects using the word like or as, such as
"His nose is like a cherry." The objects being compared cannot be from the same class. For ex
ample, the statement "London is like Paris" contains no simile because the objects being co
paredare from the same class (i.e., both are cities).
jocial constructivism A theory concerning the nature of eTilTnoêrcore
umamst's concept of essentialism. Social constructivism argu describe peopleareso-
0 human essence that can be defined with finite terms. A1 terms u m us^be deconstructed
P a^y instructed and steeped in ideological assumptions, J a i nUJie/ andfemale are
.hey can be reconstrocted. Words such as h ow osex m l B, ^meaning
with societal prejudices and must be reexamined. For soctal construct,
^ words is always in flux. rfeature tells one story, the
2 * * * Fh.se According to the mythic critic Northrop Frye, ^ story o( humanity's
r,l my,h. which consists of four phases. The spring P
hunt frustration and anxiety to freedom and happmess.
328 Glossary
structural modal Another name for the tripartite model of Freud's model of the human psy.
che consisting of the conscious, preconscious, and unconscious.
structuralism An approach to literary analysis that flourished in the 1960s. By using the tech-
niques, methodologies, and vocabulary of linguistics as articu ate y cr man e aussure,
structuralismoffers a scientific viewof howwe achieve meaning not on y in 1 erary works but
also inall forms of communication and social behavior.
Structuralists believe that codes, signs, and rules govern all social and cultural practices, in
cluding communication, the ''language" of sports, friendships, e ucation, an iterature.
Structuralists want todiscover the codes that they believe give meaning toall our social andcul
tural customs. The proper study of meaning and, therefore, reality is an examination of the sys
tembehind these practices, not the individual practices themselves.
For structuralist critics, the proper study of literature becomes a study of the conditions sur
rounding the act of interpretation itself, not an in-depth investigation of an individual work.
Structuralists believe that a study of the grammar, or the systemof rules that govern literary in
terpretation, becomes the critic's primary task.
Practiced by such critics as Jonathan Culler, Tzvetan Todorov, Roland Barthes, and Gerard
Genette, structuralismchallenges NewCriticism's methodology for finding meaning within a
text.
structuralist narratology Aformof structuralism defined as the science of narrative and
used by such critics as Vladimir Propp, Tzvetan Todorov, Roland Barthes, and Gerard Genette.
Narratologists illustrate howa story's meaning develops from its overall structure, including
elements suchas theme, persona, voice, style, grammatical structure, and tone,
structural linguistics Atermused synonymously with linguistics, the science of language.
stylistics Aformof structuralism that interprets a text on the basis of its stylethat is, dic
tion, figurative language, syntax, vocabulary, sentence structure, and others.
subaltern writers Atermcoined by the Marxist critic Antonio Gramsci to refer to writers
among those classes of people who are not in control of a culture's ideology or its hegemony.
These writers, such as African-Americans, provide new ways to see and understand cultural
forces at work in literature and inourselves.
superego Atermused bySigmund Freud to designate that part of the psyche that acts like an
internal censor, causing us to make moral judgments in light of social pressures, as differenti
ated fromthe id and the ego.
superstructure Atermused by Karl Marx todesignate that part of a culture that contains the
social, legal, political, and educational systems along with the religious beliefs, values, and art
of a society and which embodies a society's ideology that is controlled by the dominant social
class, or the bourgeoisie. Bycontrolling the base, the bourgeoisie determines a society's super
structure and, thus, controls andoppresses the working class, or proletariat. See Marxism.
supplement A termcoined by the French deconstructionist Jacques Derrida to explain the
relationship between two parts of any hierarchy upon which Western culture bases its meta
physics. For example, Derrida says Western society values light over dark. The exact relation
ship between light and dark, Derrida asserts, is not totally clear. Derrida uses the term
supplement to refer to the unstable relationship between the two elements contained in this hier
archy. Rather than being two totally separate entities, light and dark supplement each other.
Who, for example, candeclare it to be light or dark when it is dusk? Each termthus helps define
the other and is necessary for the other toexist.
supplementation The act of supplementing. See supplement.
symbol An image that represents someth,ng else and that can have multiple interpretations.
Ihere are hvo types: a pubhc symbol embodies universal meaning, such as a rose representing
loveor water symbohzmg hfe, and aprivate symbol obtains its meaning fromthe way inwhichit
,s used in a text, such as the scarlet A in Nathaniel Hawthorne's romance The Scarlet Utter.
Glossary 329
rding 1 )aCClUCS LaC37 ' the Sym^ UuC rder is the second phas* of our
AccOrt h which we leam language. In this stage we alsolearn to d.fferenti-
w0liC rfn0tnent. du" J ter gender differences, and learn cultural norms and laws.
genderS' that our fathers represent these cultural norms, and thus we master a
>te t^ e wOr^ introduced by the French structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure

ot \inguistiC terms of language analysis that studies one language at one partial-
a'a wrotic , ;onate a ProCe* :7;ne. how that language functions, not its historical deveW
< > > ^ u L e 8 See diachronic. - fUillCU*
develop-
titne in wa long eXPa matical structure of a sentence, particularly
ts e d tu n g u is U c s to describe ihe rules ârucularly
goveuun* the arrangement of
, ÎV-
^ o r d se n d
rds in phrases, clauses, duu û en cese e s. . governing the arrangement rrf
1thesis A term used by the German nk-i ~ 6 lllt *
nr. According (o Hegel, a Ihesis is presented? Geor Hegel to " *
at develops from the ensuing debate or discuis by a ho* *w ideas
A- - termed coined by the Russian Formalist v " * ^
prose; narrative has two aspects: fabula or v.t,k
svuzh a Accord
, ?^ r ShWky.......
, devices a writer uses to transform the s t o r y ^ ^ Ufhet < Plot)
,ces a writer uses to transform the story (see fabuIôpWB* c o n s ^ ,?
digressions, surpnses, disruption, and so forth, the wrLr , ^ ^such^literaryde-
i work
of literature
s u r pthat
n s e snow
- has the potential "to make fabuIa' makingthe
render a fresh view of the text's languagethe T S F * * '
miliarization. 8 8 ' the reader s world, or both. See
(logical The adjective of the philosophical term teleology, the studvo f thee -a
in the natural world. It denotes a worldview or philosophy of life assem1
g forward toward some known end, especially one relating to nature. Fôsetui
ion A term used in literary criticism that is synonymous with conflict. It designates the
>sitions or conflicts operating with a text. 3
Aterm used by the Russian Formalists to mean a unified collectionof variousliteraryde-
and conventions that can be objectively analyzed.
iretical criticism Type of criticism that formulates the theories, principles, andtenets of
lature and value of art. By citing general aesthetic and moral principles of art, theoretical
:ismprovides the necessary framework for practical criticism.
-is A term developed by the German philosopher Georg Hegel to explainhownewideas
ir. Hegel asserts that a thesis (a statement) is presented, follow ed by a counterstatement, the
thesis. The new idea that will emerge from the debate or logical argument is t e syn
k description Coined by the cultural M th r o p o lo ^ ^ li^ r d O ^ ^ b ^ J^ the
y criticism via Cultural Poetics, this term is used y P practice. By focusing on
singly insignificant but abundant details presen in any contradictoryforces at
e details, Cultural Poetics critics believe they can revea
kwithin a culture. . j femjnism.
d-world feminism A term s y n o n y m o u s with postco Alfred Sauvy at the begin-
H-world studies A term coined by the French has been traced by
S of the twentieth century. The term is no o
^colonialism. fh-century c r itic , essayist Pf'
According to Matthew Arnold,^
ch s to n e t h e o r y Iines a n d writ-
teacher, scholars and critics must "have a w a y ^ poetry." By corT1Pa^ &{ the sublime,
f masters, and to apply them as a touchstone ^ contain eleme * ^ the mas-
llnes by contemporary poets to the classical p or bad. HaV1"gher a contemporary
C,ritlc will instantly know whether a new p o e m * j ^ f o g vvhe
5 ---- su^^tcolves be touchstones,
330 Glossary
work is good. In Arnold's theory the critic functions as an authority on values, culture, and
tastes, becoming a watchdog tor high culture and its literature.
toxic consciousness Coined by the ecocritic Cynthia Deitering, this term refers to those
works of literature that highlight apocalyptic themes in postindustnal ecosystems,
traditional historical approach Methodology of interpretation that asserts that a cntic place
a work in its historical setting, paying attention to the author's life, the time period in which the
work was written, and the cultural milieu of both the text and the author,
tragedy Although the term is used in many different ways, in literary criticism, the term
chiefly refers to Aristotle's definition found in the P oetics . Tragedy is an imitation of a noble
and complete action, having the proper magnitude; it employs language of linguistic adorn
ment, applied separately in the various parts of the play; it is presented in dramatic, not narra
tive form, and achieves, through the representation of pitiable and fearful incidents, the
catharsis of such pitiable and fearful incidents." See hamartia.
transactional A term introduced by Louise M. Rosenblatt to describe the process or event
that takes place at a particular time and place when a reader transacts with a text. According to
Rosenblatt, the text and the reader condition each other because the text acts as a stimulus or a
blueprint for eliciting various experiences, thoughts, and ideas of the reader those found in
both real life and in reading experiences. The result of this experience or "aesthetic transaction" is
the creationof a poem, or what has beentraditionally called the interpretation. See aesthetic read
ing and transactional experience.
transactional experience According to the reader-oriented critic Louise M. Rosenblatt, both
the reader of a text and the text itself transact (not interact) during the reading process. The text
acts as a stimulus for eliciting various experiences, thoughts, and ideas from the reader, those
found in both our everyday existence and in reading experiences. Simultaneously the text
shapes the reader's experiences, selecting, limiting, and ordering the ideas that best conformto
the text. This overall event or act is what Rosenblatt dubs the transactional experience.
transcendental signified Atermintroduced into literary criticismby the French deconstruc
tionist Jacques Derrida. In trying "to turn Western metaphysics on its head," Derrida asserts
that fromthe time of Plato to the present, Western culture has been founded upon a classic, fun
damental error: the search for a transcendental signified, an external point of reference upon
which one may build a concept or philosophy. Once found, this transcendental signified would
provide ultimate meaning. It would guarantee a "center" of meaning, allowing those who
believe in it to structure their ideas of reality around it. According to Derrida, Western meta
physics has invented a variety of such centers, including God, reason, origin, being, truth,
humanity, and the self.
tripartite model Sigmund Freud's most famous model of the human psyche. In this model
Freud divides the psyche into three parts: the id, the ego, and the superego.
trope Atermsynonymous with a figure of speech or a word or phrase not meant to be taken
literally. The termhas now been used by several schools of criticism in a variety of specialized
meanings.
typographical model A model of the human psyche devised by Sigmund Freud. In this
model Freud divides the psyche into three parts: the conscious, preconscious, and
unconscious.
unconscious Atermused in Freudian psychoanalysis to refer to the part of the humanpsyche
that receives and stores our hidden desires, ambitions, fears, passions, and irrational thoughts,
undecidability Atermused by deconstructionists and other postmodern critics to decree that
a text's meaning is always in flux, never final. Accordingly, foreclosure of meaning for any text
is impossible. See aporia, arche-writing, deconstruction, misspeaks, and poststructuralism.
unfinalizability Atermdevised by the Russian Formalists to assert that people can never be
fully known, either to themselves or anyone else.
matical A term used to refer to
* C n to the grammatical rules of a la n g u ^ * ' p,r<*. cW ^
COhomeUo A term coined by the p8tcoU a"<i ^
tflth rolonial subject perceives the world as a H,*
",at|,e coloniser and of the indigenous t w ' , , ^ 1* * [f,
0 Gonial subject feeling caught between two J n ^ "dubU f
JS S w < - * S2SJ * A a & y S lS ;
^privileged A term introduced into literary crL ^ "M ***
T raues Derrida. According to Derrida, Western societvT ^ by the French d
umptions on opposites, such as good/bad, light/daA, a7 d' Z Z u
rvrrida asserts that Western culture values or Vrivik^ Z ake->"*h
privileging the second. See privileged and binary operaLs wh,W
unvoiced In linguistics, any sound made without vibrating the vocal folds, such as/,/ .
and / k / - ' f 1,
Verhaltnisse According to Marxist critics, everything, including ou, social lh,
dynamic re la tio n s h ip -a Verhaltm sse-w ith each other. For Maoist critics, nothmg Z Z .
isolation.
Vermittlung A term used in Marxist criticism to assert the interrelatedness of all things,
everything exists in a dynamic relationship mediated by social forces.
rt 1 reader A term devised by the narratologist Gerald Prince to differentiate amongthe
* i lirhm l and ideal readers. According to Prince, the virtual reader is the reader to whom, the
In hor believes he or she is writing. See real reader and ideal reader.
M in linguistics, any sound in winch the vocal folds a^brought d c . together ard -
to vibrate, causing air to pass between t evn, sue reflection theory concerning the reU-
rectly reflects or mirrors the base ^ ^ ^ criticism,

wage slaves Another term or , fnr worldview. . ... b to rwA'
Weltanschauung The German wor lhe ultimate o S^ 'abU*ed.
worker's paradise,
~ w the
the
highest stage, A
the w orker'ss paradise,
worker - in in
wnim
ccording to para
James Sire ^ ^ text
his text Tte U" ' ^ us,y
The Universe Next0ruw
unconsoo
m * .-
5-
nrldview Arm -^ e nrding to nJarrte
n o s itio s that we alln hold, either
either conscious
co - y imaginative andt enutiveas-
_^;veas-
riaview ' that w e o
nptions or presuppositi ât tê imagi
lie makeup of our world. Kleraturhthataim
irtkunst The German wor nts, f0r any 1
:ts of literature are its essential c o m p >crlttc>
tic symbol A term used in &

a cup, a cave, or a vase.
i n d e x
Clinton, Hillary Rodham, 143

ASLE. See Association o f Close readers, 53
Absolutist critic, 7 Literature and the
Academy, 20, 21 Close reading, 56
Environment (ASLE)
Adamson, Joni, 234 Coleridge, Samuel T., 233
Association for the Advancement
Addison, Joseph, 32-33 Collective meaning, 80
of Sustainability in Higher
Adorno, Theodor, 171 Collective unconscious, 131
Education, 230
Adivntures of Huckleberry Finn, 194 Colonial interests, 200
Association of Literature and the
Aesthetic experience, 56-57 The Colonizer and the Colonized, 201
Environment (ASLE), 234
Aesthetic reading, 73 The Color Purple, 214
Attentive reading, 174
Aesthetics, 14 The Communist Manifesto, 167,168
Aesthetic theory, 124 Auden, W. H., 91
Concretized text, 79
Affective fallacy, 58 Autotelic artifact, 70
Condensation, 129-130
Affective stylistics, 81 The Awakening, 151
Connotation(s), 60
African-American criticism,
Bacon, Francis, 86 Conscious, 125
210-219
Bad critics, 62 The Country and the City, 233
analysis, 218
black arts movement, 215-216 Bakhtin, Mikhail, 44-46 Course in General Linguistics, 92
Civil Rights Era, 215 Bakhtin Circle, 44 Cricket, 216
critics, 218-219 Baldwin, James, 215 Criteria of Negro Art, 276-284
Great Depression, 214-215 Balzac, Honors de, 146 Culler, Jonathan, 104
Harlem Renaissance, 213-214 Baraka, Amiri, 216 Cultural criticism, 199
post-Civil War era, 213 Barthes, Roland, 101-102 Cultural Critique, 217
Aggressive instinct, 126 Baudelaire, Charles-Pierre, 146 Cultural feminism, 158
Alienation effect, 172 Beardsley, Monroe C., 57 Cultural materialism, 187
Alighieri, Dante, 27-28 Beauvoir, Simone de, 149-150 Cultural model, 153
Allegoric reading, 28 Behn, Aphra, 147-148 Cultural Poetics, 183
Allophones, 94 Benjamin, Walter, 171,186 accepted ideas, 192-193
Althusser, Louis, 173-174 Bhabha, Homi K., 205-206 analysis, 195
Always Coming Home, 236 Binary oppositions, 110-111 assumptions, 188
Amazon feminism, 157-158 Biological model, 153 critics, 195-196
American deconstructionists, Black Skin, White Masks, 203 historical root, 184-187
118-119 Bleich, David, 80-81 history, 191-192
American Women, 150 Boccaccio, Giovanni, 28-29 interpretative analysis, 191
" A Modest Proposal/' 187 Bonaparte, Napoleon, 146,170
Anal stage, 128 methodology, 193-195
Bourgeoisie, 168 rejected ideas, 192
Analytical psychology, 124 Brecht, Bertolt, 172
Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays, texts, 191
British Empire, 200
124,132 Cultural studies, 174
Brokeback Mountain, 220-223 Culture and Imperialism, 205
Anima, 132 Brooks, Cleanth, 61
Animus, 132 Culture and Society 1780-1950,174
Brown, Mary M., 51-52
Antiessentialist theory, 229. Cuningham, Kate, 143
Bryson, Scott, 234
See also Queer theory Buell, Lawrence, 232-233
Antiromance phase, 133 " Dancing through the
Bunch, Charlotte, 162
Antithesis, 167 Minefield," 144
Butler, Judith, 227-228
An Apology for Poetry, 30 Darwin, Charles, 147
Aporia, 120 Das Kapital, 168
Appetencies, 71 r ____jtu u -lV J 7
Decolonization, 201
Applied criticism, 7 Camivalistic atmosphere, 46
Carr, Kevin, 223 Deconstruction. See also Derrida,
Aquinas, Thomas, 145 Jacques
Arab-Israeli War, 204 Carson, Rachel, 233
Castration complex, 128-12S American, 118-119
Archetypal criticism, 132 analysis, 119
Archetypes, 131 Castro, Fidel, 201
Catalyst, 57-58 assumptions, 109-112
Arche-writing, 112-114 critiques and responses,
Aristotle, 22-24,145 Catharsis, 24
Cathexes, 126 121-122
Arnold, Matthew, 6, 40-42 historical development,
Chay, Deborah G., 219
ArS 24^25 <The ^ Petry)/ Chen, Jeffrey, 223 107-109
Art and Social Life, 170 Chopin, Kate, 151 methodologies, 112-115
Artifacts, 14 Chora, 156 reading strategy, 117-118
rhe Art of Fiction," 43 ClimateCommitment docui textual analysis, 116-117
230,231 Deconstruction theory, 225
Defamiliarization, 50
332
o f P t*11? ' 3' 3 7 Economic model, of Freud, 126
/P^?ynthU,236 Ecosphere, 235. Sec also
Ecocritlciftm
pristine, 147 Ego, 127
^ Jacqu es, tN, 107, 175, Elder, John, 234
^ 7 206,225.Sr</*> Electra complex, 129
Dea^trucfon Eliot, T. S., 55-56,9 1
^ g m e nu t 1o n ,,7H
w^vvntmg, U2- 114 Elizabethan worldview, 182
Ellison, Ralph, 215
di^raiH^ *-5 Ellmann, Mary, 150 Freeman m "'
Lwocentnsm, 110 Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 146, 233 Pr^ ,S,'gmaJnydK|^ l^ JM
metaphvsics ot presence, The Empire Writes Back: Theory nn dream*, 129-130 30
111-112 and Practice in Post-Colonial
phonocentrism, 111 Literatures, 201 econm,Cmd<lf, 125-126
Endymion, 294
economic model of )2a
Saussure'ssign and, 109
andstructuralism, 108 Engels, Friedrich, 167-168 Phaseof, 127-128
supplementation, 114 Enneads, 26
transcendental signified, The Environmental Imagination: *^26-127 *Cal models
109-110 Thoreau, Nature Writing, and Freudianslips, 126
pescartes, Ren, 85-86 the Formation of American Friedan, Betty, 150-151
The Descent o f Man, 147 Culture, 232 Fromm, Harold, 231
pescriptivegrammar, 96 Environmentalism, and Frye, Northrop, 124,132-133
pestructiveinstinct, 126 ecocriticism, 232-233. See duller, Margaret, 233
pevices, 49 also Ecocriticism Fundamental Problems of
Marxism, 170
TheDevil's Trill Sonata, 123 Environmental Studies
The Future o f Environmental
piachronic approach, 92 Association of Canada, 234 Criticism: Environmental
The Dial, 233 Epic theater, 172 Crisis and Literary
Dialectical criticism, 174-175 Epiphany, 7 Imagination, 232
Dialectical materialism, 167 Episteme, 189
Dialectical self-awareness, 175 Epistemology, 227 Gallagher, Catherine, 187
Dialogicheteroglossia, 2 Erasure, 112 Gates, Henry Louis, Jr., 216,
Dialogized heteroglossia, 45 Eros, 125-126 217-218,219
Dictionary o f the English Esoteric work, 22 Gay and lesbian studies, 226-227.
Language, 31 An Essay o f Dramatic Poesy, 31 See also Queer theory
Differance, 114-115 Essentialism, 225 Geertz, Clifford, 190-191,194
Displacement, 129 Exoteric treatises, 22 Gender, 228
Dollimore, Jonathan, 187 Extrinsic analysis, 54 Gender Trouble, 228
The Genealogy of the Gods, 29
ADoor into Ocean, 236
Doubleconsciousness, 205 Fabula, 50 Genette, Gerard, 104
Fall phrase, 133 9 Gilbert, Sandra, 136
Double-voicedness, 218 F alse consciousness, 168-169 Giovanni, Nikki, 216
Douglas, Susan, 163 Faludi, Frantz,
Susan, 163 Glotfelty, Cheryll, 231, 232
Douglass, Frederick, 213 Fanon, 201,203-204 Going to the Territory, 215
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, 124 Goldberg, Jonathan, 228
Dreams
Female phase, 1^ 151 The Golden Notebook, 151-152
The Feminine M ysOf/u , Good critics, 62
latentcontent of, 129-130 Feminine phf^' " A Good Man Is Hard to Find, 8
manifest content of, 138 Feminism, 143^16455 Go Tell It on the Mountain, 215
significance of, 129-130 American, l-> Grammar, 96 qs
Dryden, John, 30-32 analysis, 161 ^ Grammatical morphemes,
DuBois, VV.E. B., 210, 213 assumptions, 1 Grammatology, 112
Durrant, Sam, 206 British, 155 iticjSm, rram sci, Antonio, l . .
contemporary enne Grams, gnvlutu-m: A
Eagleton, Terry, 174, 175 THe History of FeministDe*g>* ft*
w ly Spring Aubade, 51-52 l^ r ^ p o n ^ . ' 61- 64 American Homes, L
Feocriticism cri,iCh ISMS? , GraPn b lT tt"te rh e n ,1 8 8 ,f
analysis, 236-237 Greenblan,- \ also
assumptions, 234-235 "Green studies,
Ecocnhcism 9
concept of, 231-232 methodolog^^ticism/'144 G rif^FaraM asm .ne,
critics of, 237-238 "Feminist L>
ôncaldeve^ ment Guatta'nîf
Gubar, Susan, 136^ M.,203
232-234 Gugelberg1 ' ^
Methodology, 235-236 Gynoenj^'
overview 230_231
Gynocritics-
cocriticism Reader: Landmarks "Flowering ^ 3
i 5Tljrt:/
334 Index Longinus, 25-26
Love, GlenA., 234
LukAcs, Georg, 171,186
I foiling the uhject Luther, Martin, 145
lUmwtw. W rt }l2 Lyceum, 22
fommon lup'^-r. 210. 212
Harlem 2i
Lyotard, Jean-Franqois, 89
Harmon, Nuholaa, ^ Keats, John, 2 * * 'Z t 123 Lyrical Ballads, 35,36,233
Hartman. Geottrev.
Hawthorne, Nathaniel 66, 14' KemdKe. Wch-rd. 233-234 Macherey, Pierre, 174
1^4. W5, 228 K ernel, Dn.elM., 223 The M achine in the Garden:
Hawthorne. Sophia, 194 Kolodny, Annette, Technology and the Pastoral
Hayden, Dolores, 158 Krino (Greek word)' 6 Ideal in America, 238
Hegel Georg W. F., 167 Kristeva, Julia, 136,1 Mad fo r Foucault: Rethinking the
Hegemony, 172-173 Kritikos (Greek word), 6 Foundations o f Queer Theory,
Heresy ot paraphrase, 60 229
Hermeneutical principles, 4 La Belle Dame Sans M em/' 233 Mailloux, Steven, 81
Hermeneutics of recovery, 4
Hermeneutics of suspicion, 4
Lacan, Jacques, 125/133- Mander, Anica Vesel, 162
human psyche model ot, M anichean A esthetics: The Politics
"Heroic Ethnocentrism," 272-276
134-136 I'** o f Literature in Colonial
Hesiod, 145 and textual analysis, 13o
Heteroglossia, 45 Africa, 217
Lamming, George, 201 Manifest content of dream, 138
History of English Literature, 38-39
Language Marcuse, Herbert, 171
History of Sexuality, 229
and parole, 96 Marx, Adolph Bernhard, 165
Holistic approach, 47
structure of, 93-96
Holland, Norman, 80
Latent content of dream, 137-138 Marx, Karl, 167-170
Hopkins, Gerard Manley, 147
Lauretis, Teresa de, 224
Marx, Leo, 238
Horace, 24-25
Lazos, Book VIII, 21
Marxism, 165-180
Horizons of expectation, 78 analysis, 179
Horkheimer, Max, 172 Le Guin, Ursula K., 236
The House of the Seven Gables, 194 Le Livre de la Cite des Dames, 147 assumptions, 176-178
Huffer, Lynne, 229 Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich, 170 critics of, 180
Hughes, Langston, 214 Lesbianization of language, 160 methodology, 178-179
Hurston, Zora Neale, 214 Les Guerilleres, 152 Russia and, 170-171
Hybridity, 205-206 Lessing, Doris, 151 M arxism and Form , 174
Hybridization, 45 Letter to Can Grande della Scala, 28 M arxism and Literary Criticism , 175
Levin, J., 235 McBride, Sean, 222
Identities, 228 Lvi-Strauss, Claude, 100-101 McCarthy, Todd, 221
Identity theme, 80 Lexicon, 95 McGann, Jerome, 187
Ideological state apparatus, 173 Linear, defined, 189 Melin, Eric, 222
Ideology, concept of, 168 Linguistic model, 153 Memmi, Albert, 201
Iliad, 20
Imaginary order, in Lacan's
Linguistic revolution, 92-93 Metaphor, 95
Linguistics, 49 Metaphysics, 25
model, 134 pre-Saussurean, 91-92
Impressionistic critics, 54 Literacy experience, 73
Metaphysics of presence, 111-112
Incidents in the Life of a Slave Literariness, 49
Miller, J. Hillis, 119
Girl, 213
Literary competence, 104
Millett, Kate, 150, 224
Intentional fallacy, 57 Literary critic, 5-6
Mimetic theory, 92
Interpellation, 173
Literary criticism Mirror stage, inLacan's model, 134
The Interpretation of Dreams, 124 defined, 5 ,6 -7 Misogyny, 152
Interpretive community, 81
historical survey, 19-47 Modernism, 54
Intertextuality, 8 Modernity, 85-87,90-91
readings on, 249-299
Introductory Lectures on
Literary theory, 17-18 Moi, Toril, 144
Psychoanalysis (Twenty-first
Lecture), 128 defined, 7-9 Monomyth, 133
Invisible Man, 215 function of, 15-17 Morpheme, 94
Irigaray, Luce, 136 reading process and, 10-12 Morphology, 95
Iser, Wolfgang, 78-79 Morrison, Toni, 219
f i u S j lôduction, 175 Murphy, Patrick D., 238
I Stood Tip-toe Upon a Little
Hill/ 287 function of, 15-17 My Larger Education, 213
literary theory and, 14-15 Mythemes, 100-101
Jacobs, Harriet, 213 l iterature and Ecology: An Mythic criticism, 132
James, Henry, 42-43,66 Experiment in Ecocriticism,"
Narratemes, 103
Fre? ric' 174~17^ 203 Literature and Revolution, \7q Narrative functions, 103
janMohamcd, Abdul, 217
Jauss, Hans Robert, 78 Narrative of the Life of Frederick
Jazz, 214 u ! Z u7Joseph,
L'tvak, asExp,oration^2
228 Douglass, 213
Jefferson, Thomas 1<M Narratology, 76-77,102-103
Jewett, Sarah Orne, 151 t-ocke, Alain LeRoy, 2 l 3 - 2 u Native Son, 215
Eogocentrism, 110,225 Naturalism, 54
Nature, 233
ind ex
335
Plekhanov, G eo rg y V., 170
A.,222 Plotinu s, 20, 2 6 -2 7
P oem , 53
Q-54, Poems on Various Subjects, fem inist theory and
Religious and Moral, 212
P oetics, 4*9
Poetics, 2 2 -2 3 Kinder studio an<j 22A
^ i ^'^sponses. t&-*
P olitical u n co n scio u s, 175
The Political Unconscious, 175 assum ptions, 224-227
Politics and Letters, 174 theorists, 227-228
****** **
i^8 1*3 188 P o ly p h o n ic n o v el, 46 Queer Theory: Lesbian and Gay
-~ ny Sexualities, 224 y
P ope, A lexan d er, 3 3 - 3 4 ,1 4 5
- ^ - r ,s5 P op ick , Jo n , 222 Q uindlen, Anna, 162
Porphyry, 26
jS -tJS w P ostcolon ial criticism , 2 07 Ransom , Kevin A., 223
Reader
vv* w,217 Postcolonial Criticism: History,
actual, 79
Theory, and ffo? Worlt o f
close, 53
Fiction, 203
ideal, 77
ytrfl*2 P o stco lo n ial fem in ism , 158
real, 77
^ th e o ry of art 57 P o stco lo n ialism , 1 9 7 -2 0 9
virtual, 77
< ** Flannery, 2-4 , 5, 7 -8 a n a ly sis, 208
The Reader, the Text, the Poem,
^ S U ^ , ^ 296 a ssu m p tio n s, 2 0 3 -2 0 6
10, 72
critics, 209
I ^ W 1''233' 293 historical developm ent, 200-201
Reader-oriented criticism, 65-84
analysis, 82-83
S5?Smpl.>2 m eth od ology, 2 0 6 -2 0 8
assum ptions, 73-75
a Gremmatology, 112,2 0 6 P ostcolon ial N arrative an d the Work
critiques and responses, 83-84
-Onthe Grasshopper and o f M ou rn in g, 206
historical development, 69-73
Cricket/' 297 T he P ost-C olon ial Studies methodology, 75-82
Ontological critics, 53 R eader, 202 Reading
Oral phase, 127 P ostcolon ial theory, 207 aesthetic, 73
Organic unity, 59 P o stist critics, 1 9 7 -198 close, 56
Orientalism, 204 P ostm od ern fem in ism s, 157 efferent, 73
Orientalism, concept of, 204 P ostm od ern ism , 8 8 -9 0 Reading "Capital," 173
n, Outsider. 215 P ostm odern ism , or the C ultural Real order, 136
L og ic o f L ate C apitalism , 175 Reception aesthetics, 81
Fankhurst, Emmeline, 161 P oststru ctu ralism , 1 0 6 -1 0 7 Reception theory, 78
Parapraxes, 126 P ou nd , E zra, 91 Reflection theory, 171
Parmenides, 26 P ractical criticism , 7 Relativism , 58
Parole, 96 P ractical C riticism : A Study o f Relativistic critic, 7
Party Organization and Party L iterary ju dgm en t, 71 The Resisting Reader: A Feminist
Literature, 170 P recon sciou s, 1 2 6 -1 2 7 Approach to American
Past the Last Post: Theorizing P re-Sau ssu rean linguistics, 9 1 -9 2 Fiction, 144
Post-Colonialism and P rescrip tiv e gram m ar, 96 Rhetorical criticism, 69-70
Post-Modernism, 2 0 1 P rin ce, G erald , 7 6 -7 7 Rich, Adrienne, 163
Patriarchal c u ltu r e , 228 P rin ciples o f Literary C riticism , 71 Richards, I. A., 56, 70-71
Patriarchy, 144 P rod u ction theory, 173 Rogers, Nick, 222
Penis envy, 129 P roletariat, 168 Rom ance phase, 133
Pennsylvania M agazine, 2 1 2 P ropp, V ladim ir, 102-103 Romanticism, 54
Personal c o n s c io u s , 131 A Room o f One's Oum, 224
Prosody, 62
Personal u n c o n s c io u s , 131 P ro u d h o n , P ierre-Josep h, 146 Rorty, Richard, 89
iêrs, John, 212 P rou lx, E. A n n ie, 220
Rosenblatt, Louise M., 10, 72-73
i, Robert, 222
gallic stage, 128 P sy ch o an aly sis, 124
- U * 5ym, >eau, Jean-Jacques, 145
P sy ch o a n aly tic criticism , 123142
^Mocentri: cert, William H., 232
133 an aly sis, 141 Anne K., 162
Ûocentri:
SÛus, 135
assu m p tio n s, 1 3 7 -138 _c,Aftnj 1icm 48 52
critiq u es and responses,
w!?0menoj 1 4 1 -1 4 2
h istorical develop m en t, phase, 128
1 2 5 -1 3 6 Wadie, 204-205
S S 3 r* m eth od olo g ies, 138-141 alentine d e, 147
P sy ch oan aly tic m odel, 153 a ,216
2 ^ Cs,94 Psych obiograp hy, 138 ius, 212-213
in s, 222
Pia^!gy,94 Q u eer theory, 2 2 3 -2 2 9 , 2 8 4 -2 8 7
PL./ ^ 2 2 ,1 4 5
an aly sis, 228 _
Principle 126 and com p artm en ta 1ization,
336 Index
Understanding PoetryAn
Subaltern writers, 19^
Anthology for College
Sauvy, Alfred, 201 Subjective criticism, Students, 64
Savoir (French verb), 16 Superego, 127 Unfinalizability, 45
The Scarlet letter, 194 Supplementation, n *
The Second Sex, 224 Ungrammatical sentences, 95
Swann, Joseph, 294 Unhomeliness, 205
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky, 227 Swietek, Frank, 222
Selfhood, 225-226 Up from Slavery, 213
Swift, Jonathan, 187
Self-identity, 228 Symbolic order, in Lacan s
Sells, Mark, 222 Venable, John, 221
model, 134-136
Semanalysis, 140 Verhaltnisse, 176
Symbols, 52 . Vemer, Karl, 92
Semantic features, 95 Symbols of Transformation, 13U
Semantics, 95 Vemiere, James, 221
Svnchroruc approach, 92
Semiotic interpretation, 28 Vesser, H. Aram, 195
Syntax of language, 95
Semiotics, 98
Synthesis, 167
A Vindication o f the Rights of
Semiotique, 140-141 Woman, 148, 224"
Separatist feminism, 158 Syuzhet, 50
Vulgar Marxism, 171
Sexual instinct, 125-126
Tame, Hippolyte A., 38-40
Sexual politics, 150 Waffle, Willie, 221
Tartini, Giuseppe, 123
Sexual Politics, 224 Wage slaves, 168
Shadow and Act, 215 Tate, Claudia, 219
Walden: or, Life in the Woods, 233
Shakespeare, William, 201 The Tatler, 32
Walker, Alice, 214
Shaw, George Bernard, 91 Taylor, Dawn, 222
Teleological concept, 189 Warner, Michael, 228
Shelley, Percy Bysshe, 37-38 Warren, Austin, 181
Showalter, Elaine, 152-153 The Tempest. 201
Tendencies, 227 Washington, Booker T., 213
Sidney, Sir Philip, 29-30 Wellek, Ren*, 181
Signification, 105 Textual analysis, deconstructive
suppositions for, 116-117 The Well Wrought Um, 60
The Signifying Monkey, 218
'The Human Seasons,' 296-297 Weltanschauung, 171
Sign systems, 105-106
Silent Spring, 233 Their Eyes Were Watching God, 214 West. Rebecca, 162
Slave narrative, 212-213 "The Negro Speaks of Western metaphysics, 225
'Sleep and Poetry,' 290-291 Rivers," 214 Wheatley, Phillis, 210,
Slonczewski, Joan, 236 The One, 20 211-212,213
Social constructivism, 225 Theoretical criticism. 7 White, Hay den, 119
Sophocles, 145 A Theory of Literary Pn\iucthm. 174 White Man, Listen/, 215
The Souls of Black Folk, 213 Theory of Literature. 1*1 Williams, Raymond, 174,
Southey, Robert, 146 Thick description. 190 186, 233
Spaceship Earth, 231 Third-world feminism, 158 Wimsatt, W'llliam K., 57
The Spectator, 32 Third-world studies, 201 Wittig, Monique, 152
Spivak, Gayatri, 206 Thoreau, Henry1David, 233 Wolfson, Susan, 296, 298
Spring phase, 133 Thus $i*ike Zarathustra, 8 9 , 130 Wollstonecraft, Mary, 148, 224
Stalin, Joseph, 171 Tiffin, Helen, 201 Woman 's Chronicle, 143
Stevenson, Robert Louis, 124 Todorov, Tzvetan, 103-104 Woolf, Virginia, 91,146-149
Stone, Sandy, 228 Toppman, Lawrence, 221 Word, Saussure's redefinition,
Structuralism, 76-77,105-106 Touchstone theory', 41 96-98
analysis, 120 Tracy, Destutt de, 168 Wordsworth, William,
assumptions, 98-100 Traditional historical approach, 34-36,233
critiques and responses, 120-121 169 Worker's paradise, 168
methodologies, 100-105 Transactional experience, 72 The Wretched o f the Earth,
model of interpretation, 105 Transcendental signified, 109-110 201,204
Structuralist Poetic: Structuralism, Treichler, Paula, 162 W'right, Richard, 215
Linguistics, and the Study of Tripartite model, 127
Literature, 104 Trotsky, Leon, 170-171 X, Malcolm, 216
Structural linguistics, 91 Tucker, Ken, 221
Structural model, 127 Twain, Mark, 146,166,194
"Structure, Sign, and Play in the Yeats, W. B., 91
Discourse of the Human Yoruc symbol, 139
U n c o n s c io u s , 1 2 5 "Young Goodman Brown/'
Sciences," 121,256-271
U n d e c id a b ih ty , 1 0 6
66-67, 239-248

Literary Criticism - C.E. Bressler

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Literary Criticism - C.E. Bressler

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

l it e r a r y

If youre wondering why you

A se p ara te a p p e n d ix c o n ta in s e ssa ys that Criticism to give each of these importat

w o r k s b y C le a n th B ro o k s a n d Jacque Consistent Literary Model: All school!

D e rrid a that p ro v id e in sig h t to t he sc h oo l o f criticism are applied to a common

b e in g studied. se lec tion - "Young Goodman Brown" to

sh o w h o w one work can be interpreted

, Russian Formalism and New Criticism <

Vladimir Propp and Narratology U)2

6 Psychoanalytic Criticism 123

9 Cultural Poetics or New Historicism 181

11 African-American Criticism 210

12 Queer Theory: Gay and Lesbian Criticism 220

Literary Selection 239

Readings on Literary Criticism 249

"I leroie ItlhiuH'entrism: The? Idea of Universality i,

Bressler begins his text with a chapter defining

a.so an approachable source for apply.ng theory to text ^

After the Methodology Section, a newly revised Questions for Analysis

Because I believe in the intertextuality of texts, I readily acknowledge that

xvi To the Reader

Criticism should be a casual conversation.

W. H. Auden, The Table Talk ofW. H. Auden

EAVESDROPPING ON A LITERATURE C LA SSR O O M

C A N A T E X T HAVE M O R E T H A N O N E IN TER PR ET A TIO N ?

Need a reader, however, be thinking of any of these particulars when

HOW TO BECO M E A LITERARY CRITIC

Although these students may need to master the terminology, the m

Matthew Arnold, a nineteenth-century literary critic, describes literary criti

Does a text have only one correct meaning?

What kind of person is the grandmother? Is she like my grandmother or any

Such questions immediately involve us in practical criticism. What we tend

How we as readers construct meaning through or with a text depends on the

What is the basis of morality or ethics?

ones. It is our dynamic answersincluding our doubts and fears about th

The relationship between literary theory and a reader's personal worldview

as postcolonialism, African American studies, gender studies, queer theory

Because literary criticism presupposes that there exists a work of literature to

imaginative and creative aspects of literature are essential components of the

' from different and often conflicting pin( f view. By an doing it

Critics continually debate literature's chief function. Tracing their arguments

we a'ad? #ngwets lead

learn facts or information; from tlu* other, we encounter and participate in an

Literary theory assumes that there is no such thing as an innocent reading of a

It is the goal of this text to enable readers to make such conscious

No poet, no artist, has his [or her] complete meaning alone.

T. S. Eliot, "Tradition and the Individual Talent"

in this critical debate while acquiring an appreciation for and a w0rkine

PLA TO (C. 427-347 BCE)

Alfred North Whitehead, a modern British philosopher, once quipped that

2. Art P, for,,, i , m-g.-iy,...... .... """'lie

Interestingly, nowhere in the Poetics does Aristotle address the didactic

H ORACE (65-8 BCE)

ly acquainted with Aristotle's works, his

a repeated examination, and which it is difficult or rather impossible to

Born in Egypt in 204 CE, Plotinus, the founder of Neoplatonism, traveled to

^ p u b lic . Sim u ltan eo u sly T h e O ne is "u n iq u e and absolutely uncom plex"

one thousand years earlier. Like Longinus, Dante's concern is thc

The paucity of literary criticism and theory during much

Fnelish critic-poet. His work A Apology fo r Poetry (published 1595; Gri

JOHN DRVDEN (1631-1700)

; * 8liSh Wri,er- ,0 h " D'y d e n - p e , laureate, dramatist.

lexicographer who authored Dictionary o f the English Language (1755) a work

Overall, Dryden's contribution to literary criticism is immense. First, he de