New Historicism
Hello readers!
This blog is written in response to the thinking activity assigned by Dr. Dilip Barad sir, the Department of English, MKBU, to reflect our understanding of one of the five types of Cultural Studies. So In this blog I will be dealing with 'New Historicism'. But first let's understand What is Culture and what is Cultural Studies.
What is Culture and What is Cultural Studies?
The word Culture is derived from the Latin word 'Colere' which means 'To cultivate', 'to honour' or 'to protect'. Culture is the mode of generating meaning and ideas which are valid within the culture. These meanings are governed by power, which means the culture is controlled by the elite class whereas non-elite's views are rejected. It denotes that in society, certain components of culture get more significant than others.(Nayar 4) As Patrick Brantlinger has pointed out, Cultural studies is not "a tightly coherent, unified movement with a fixed agenda," but a "loosely coherent group of tendencies, issues, and questions." Cultural studies read between these gaps of the culture. As Derrida points out binary oppositions in the theory of Deconstruction. Similarly cultural studies do the same. It looks at the mass culture.
Due to the social turmoil of 1960s, Cultural studies composed of various elements like Marxism, Poststructuralism, Postmodernism, feminism, Gender Studies, Anthropology, Sociology, race and ethnic studies, film theory, urban studies, public policy, culture studies and postcolonial studies., which focuses on social cultural forces that has created communities or caused the division and alienation.
According to 'A handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature', there are five types of Cultural Studies:
- British Cultural Materialism
- New Historicism
- American Multiculturalism
- Postmodernism and Popular Culture
- Postcolonial Studies(Guerin)
New Historicism:
New Historicism is an approach to literary criticism that mandated the interpretation of literature in terms of the milieu from which it emerged.(Britannica)(Pallardy)
This type provides a crystal clear distinction between Old Historicism and New historicism. The term 'New Historicism' was coined by Stephen Greenblatt. He is highly influenced by the thoughts of Jameson, Michael Foucault, Jean-Francois Lyotard, who raised the questions of art and society as institutionalised practices. Like Jameson blames Capitalism for creating the false distinction between the public and the private. Lyotard asserts that capitalism has forced false integration of these worlds.
Porter saw history world views magisterially unfolding as a series of tableaux in a film called Progress. Here Porter tries to connote the idea of common views held for a particular period. For example, all Elizabethan held the common views. New Historicism rejects this periodization of history in favour of ordering history only through the interplay of forms of power.
This topic begins with Laputa-"The Whore". What did Jonathan Swift mean when he gave that name to the flying island in the third voyage of Gulliver's Travels"? And as the meaning of the name of island Laputa is the whore, the question remains is why Swift has chosen this title?
Joseph Litvak notes that "If the 1970s could be called the Age of Destruction, some hypothetical survey in twentieth century criticism might well characterise the 1980s as making the return to history, or perhaps the Recovery of the Referent". Michael Warner phrases the motto of new Historicism as "The Text is Historical, and history is Textual". Whereas Frederic Jameson insisted on "Always Historicize".
New historicism is a return to the historical scholarship, which concerns itself with extraliterary matters like letters, diaries, films, paintings, medical treatises, to reveal opposing historical tensions in the text. So new historicism not only looks at the literary texts but also looks at other historical evidence while analysing it. It seeks surprising coincidences that may cross generic, historical and cultural lines in borrowing metaphor, ceremony, or popular culture. It observes cross culture phenomena as text. Therefore, new historicism also refers to the cultural artefacts prevailing in the time in which particular text is written. Cultural studies tend to have a figural relationship between present and past which is shaped by historical discourses. Clifford Geertz and many others emphasise on the importance of "deep" understanding of the culture rather than distanced observation. Carolyn Porter credits the emergence of American Studies, Women's Studies, and Afro-American Studies on college and university campuses for ushering in new historicism as a volatile new presence in literary criticism.
It discusses perspectives on capitalism and its impact on the distinction between public and private spheres. Jameson criticises as I have mentioned above as well that capitalism for creating a false separation between the public and private, while Lyotard argues that capitalism falsely integrates these realms. New historicism, positioned between these views, seeks to navigate the historical effects of capitalism without rigid economic theories. Drawing from Foucault, new historicists adopt the concept of "episteme," a broad cultural totalizing function observable in literary texts. Foucault rejects the idea of history as the progression of universal ideas and sees it as discontinuous, shaped by power and knowledge. History, he argues, is a form of social oppression with ruptures integrated into succeeding cultures. The paragraph suggests that methods of expression can be oppressive, and the modern age's complex narrative is just one among many throughout history. A new "episteme" could redefine knowledge organisation and historical storytelling.
Jameson criticises capitalism for creating a false division between the public and private realms, while Lyotard argues that capitalism instead imposes a false merging of these domains. New Historicism, as described by Veeser, attempts to reconcile the contradictory historical effects of capitalism without rigid theories. Drawing from Foucault, New Historicists adopt the idea of a broad cultural "totalizing" function called the "episteme" in literary texts. Foucault challenges the notion of history as the progression of universal ideas, arguing that we cannot know governing ideas. History, seen as discontinuous and marked by ruptures, is described as a form of social oppression to be integrated into succeeding cultures by the epistemes of power and knowledge. It suggests that methods of expression can be oppressive, and despite the modern age's complex narrative, it's considered just one narrative among many. The idea of a new "episteme" will make our current ways of organising knowledge and narrating history obsolete.
New Historicism borrows its terminology from the marketplace:
- Exchange
- Negotiation
- Circulation
H. Aram Veeser identifies "the moment of exchange" as particularly fascinating for new historians. He argues that literary texts can contain social symbolic value, and as he asserts "the critic's role is to dismantle the dichotomy of the economic and the non-economic, to show that the most ostensibly disinterested and self-sacrificing practices, including art, aim to maximise personal or symbolic profit" which suggests that critics should break down the idea that there's a strict separation between economic and non-economic aspects. He believes that even seemingly selfless practices, like art, aim to gain personal or symbolic benefits. Greenblatt also emphasises that current theories need to focus on the hidden places of negotiation and exchange. Bourdieu's concept of habitus, described as a "system of dispositions" which is like a set of habits or tendencies—similar to the unspoken knowledge needed to speak a specific language.
Now let’s look again at the question raised at the beginning of the topic: Why did Swift choose the title ‘Laputa’ which means the Whore. While answering this question in terms of new historicism, it connotes the periodisation or set of views in common.
Susan Bruce in "The Flying Island and Female Anatomy: Gynaecology and Power in Gulliver's Travels," employs the lens of new historicism to shed light on the significance of Laputa in Swift's work, particularly in Book III. explores how, in the past, there was a lot of conflict around midwives, who are women helping with childbirth. The medical profession, mostly led by men, tried to suppress them. Bruce looks at writings aimed at educated midwives and the trial of Mary Toft, who pretended to give birth to rabbits. She shows that the anger towards Toft and midwives reflected a broader hostility towards women. Bruce connects this to how women are portrayed in "Gulliver's Travels," a book by Jonathan Swift.
She suggests that Swift's discomfort with women's bodies in the book reflects the worries of society at the time when science was growing, and women's roles were changing. Bruce sees Laputa, a floating island in the story, as a symbol of the female body. The male control over Laputa mirrors the control over women in society, and the name "la puta" suggests misogyny.
However, the attempt to control women backfires for Laputa. Men on the island try to stop women from going to another place, and this leads to problems. Men on Laputa become impotent, meaning they can't have children. Bruce connects this to men's focus on impractical science and contrasts it with women who are lively and challenge their husbands. This struggle for control over women's bodies is linked to debates about language in the book, reflecting real debates in Swift's time about controlling women's speech and sexuality.
Bruce concludes with a historical note about a pamphlet published in 1727, supposedly authored by "Lemuel Gulliver, Surgeon and Anatomist to the Kings of Lilliput and Blefescu." Titled "The Anatomist Dissected: or the Man-Midwife finally brought to Bed," the pamphlet addresses Mary Toft, the "rabbet-woman," further intertwining Swift's fictional narrative with the historical context of the time. (Guerin 282-284)
Conclusion:
In a nutshell, new historicism is completely opposite to what is old historicism. Where old historicism mostly delves into the common views held in one particular period or writing or culture, new historicism rejects it and it returns to the historical scholarship which analyses the various dimensions of it rather than believing in a single narrative.
Works Cited
Guerin, Wilfred L. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Oxford University Press, 2005.
Nayar, Pramod K. An Introduction to Cultural Studies. Viva Books, 2016.
Pallardy, Richard. “Stephen Greenblatt | Biography, Books, & Facts.” Britannica, 23 September 2023, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Stephen-Greenblatt. Accessed 8 October 2023.
{Words: 1659
Images: 2
Videos: 1}
No comments:
Post a Comment