Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allinson:
But lets just hope the rumours are indeed true about the decline in theory, and that people are finally sick of having their literature reduced to mere “social documents”.
|
As one who has friends in literature departments, I don't quite share your wish. First of all, I don't think it's so much that the best New Historicists "reduce [literature] to mere 'social documents,'" but that they use historical documents to illuminate literature. At least that has been my experience. For instance, my appreciation for the prosody of Paradise Lost has been enriched by knowing what the political situation of England was during the 17th C.
I do think it's important to focus on literature, but I also think context can illuminate a text. Insofar as theory can do that and make people ask questions they wouldn't have otherwise asked, read literatures they wouldn't have otherwise read, and make readers see old texts in a new light, I'm all for it. I do agree that theory shouldn't be the be-all-and-end-all of literature, but is a tool that should be used in service of the text. However, I don't think (political, economic, cultural) context should be ignored altogether, particularly when the text draws material from such spheres.
[This message has been edited by Jodie Reyes (edited October 08, 2005).]