Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
Introduction
17
Althoughnotallpost-structuralistliterarycriticswouldbewillingto
jointheParisrevolutionof’68,followingFoucaultwhoactuallydid,itseems
thecurrentlydominanttrendofculturalstudiespaysforemostattentionto
cultureassuch,applyingmultitudeofmethodsandapproachestostudy-
ingit,involvingasdifferentmeansassemiotics,feminism,deconstruction
orpsychoanalysistoachieveapoliticalgoal,whichisexertinginfluenceon
asocialreality,asthereisnothinglikeaneutralacademicresearch.Reading
hereisnotaprivateentertainment,butanactofunderstandingandinflu-
encingthesurroundingworld,inwhichthereisnoborderbetweenliterary,
verbalorsocialtexts,thusliterarygiantsareasworthyofstudyingasgut-
terpress,comicsorcommercials,astheyallrevealhowmeaningisformed
withinaculture.Terecanbenojudgmentotherthanrevealingtheirun-
derlyingcontextandmessage,whichitselfisapoliticalactivityasinterpre-
tationinevitablyinfluencesthesociety,especiallyifitdiscloseshiddenagen-
daofauthorities.
Suchpoliticizationofliteraturefounditsprobablyclearestexpressionin
theNewHistoricism,whichclaimsthatnarrationisnotofsecondaryim-
portance,asitprefiguresmeaning,itisinevitablyaninterpretation.Nolit-
eraryanalysiscangobeyondthehistoryanddescribeitobjectivelyfrom
aneutralplacefreefromone’sownrace,gender,class,professionorother
preconceivedviews,itisalwaysanaffirmationofone’splacewithinthecul-
ture.Terefore,evenhistoricalaccountsarenotobjectivedescriptionsof
truth,but,asHaydenWhiteputit,upoeticacts”(1973:x).Inananti-positiv-
isttoneitclaimsthatugood”andubad”arevaluesdeterminedculturallyand
historically,aslanguagedoesnotreflecttheempiricalreality,butasasocial
factgivesmeaningtoit.Similarlytoculturalstudiestheycanbeseentobe
apartof,NewHistoriansareveryeclecticinmethodology,adoptingMarx-
ist,psychoanalyticalorFoucaultreadingswithoutformingadistinctlyown
method,butallinterpretationsareupoeticacts”themselves,unfortunately
clearlybiasedtowardsonlyonesideofthepoliticalspectrum.
Tepoststructuralistliterarytheorywhichseemstobearmostresem-
blancestoBuddhistapproach(atleasttotherelativelevelofreality)isprag-
matism.Pragmatismisanti-essentialist(itrejectsahistoricalbeingsen-
dowedwithasortofunchangingessence),anti-fundamentalist(rejects
non-historicalornon-empiricalrulesbeyondconventionalsocialpractices),
anti-representationist(thegoalofknowledgeisnotrepresentationofreality,
whichisnotpossibletobeexpressed,butapracticalbenefit),andanti-theo-
retical(thenatureoftheworldcannotbeultimatelydescribedinwords).It
