INTRODUCTION

MIMESISOF WHOM?
PLATO (5
th
-4
th
century BCE)
Founder of Western literary theory !ost lastin" and
trou#lin" influence
Ontolo"y of art$ %deal For!snatural &orld
('a((earances)) art a co(y of a co(y
*ocratic dialo"ues$ ad+erse to
a, !i!esis as fraud (Republic)
#, &ritin" as pharmakon/pharmakeia (Phaedrus)
%on
Techne$ factual truth (inter(retation of the !ind of a
(oet)
-ha(sode$ a critic (#y 'rules of art)) inter(reter
Poe!$ a collection of 'correct) (true-to-life) thus
!o+in" infor!ation co!(osin" a (icture of life #y +irtue
of "odly &isdo! infusin" the (oetthe rha(sodethe
audience (conta"ious !o!entary !adness)
Poets only .ualitati+ely #etter/&orse not different
(content o+er for!/style/"enre)
-is lo"ic the #est &ay to analy0e (oetry1
-should then a crafts!an 2ud"e 3o!er1
A-%*TOTLE (4
th
century BCE)
Founder of scientific !ethod (#rea4in" do&n into
co!(onents) for literary criticis!
The Poetics (c, 556 BCE)
7ot !eta(hysics #ut !echanics (!i!esis of
re(resenta#le action)
8i!esis is one its +enues !any (!ediu! o#2ect
!anner)
Content (re(resentation of life e+ent) o+er for!
Plot and 9'reasonin") ho& the (oet "ets the
!eanin" across to the audience: !ost i!(ortant in
tra"edy$
a, !ust ha+e ;E-%*%8%L%T<=E (lausi#ility
#, !ust tie to"ether O->A7%CALL? (not sla+e-li4e
co(yin" #ut artful or"ani0ation of the (arts into
&hole)
8i!esis/(oetry e@ists #ecause of$
a, natural hu!an (ro(ensity
#, deli"htful effect of learnin"
Ta@ono!y$ tra"edyA e(icA co!edyA la!(oon (&hy1)
-honora#le/"rand (oet !a4es "rand "enre ((ersonal
in+ol+e!ent not 2ust +essel for the di+ine)
=efinition of tra"edy$
a, &hen is an action '"reat) and 'co!(lete)1
&hen catharsis is achie+ed
#, &hy are there B (arts ((lotC characterC dictionC
reasonin"C s(ectacleC son")1
Co!(le@ su#2ect of te@t de!ands it
c, unity of action (DA fallacy of '5 unities)) #alanced
si0e
d, i!(ossi#le (lausi#ilities #etter than i!(lausi#le
(ossi#ilities
Poetry #etter than history #ecause$
a, uni+ersal ;* (articular hu!an truths
#, one is not li!ited #ut can create stories/characters
c, thrill ((ain re+ersals reco"nition ;* ha!artia) is
enticin"
METAPHYSICS TO LOGIC
*%- P3%LL%P *%=7E? (EB
th
century)
Elisa#ethan (oet courtier soldier '-enaissance 8an)
The =efence of Poesy (E5F6)
Turn fro! 8iddle A"es to Protestant anthro(ocentris!
7eo(latonist ((oet as (hiloso(her alludes to the %deal) G
Aristotelian (!i!esis ta@ono!y) G 3orace influence
('poeta nascitur) to instruct and deli"ht)
Led to Percy Bysshe *helleyHs A Defense of Poetr
(EFIE)
's(re00atura)$ (oetry as 'unelected +ocation) artist
'(ossessed) 'o+er!astered) 'a (ro(het) '(oetry leads)
(oetry ;* de(endence on &orld in+ents 'another
nature)
'fore-conceit) (i!a"inin" conce(tion) !ore i!(ortant
than deli+ery (for!)
so!e truth in i!a"ination$ "enerates co(ies ('ins(ired
e@e!(la) co!!unicated creati+ity)
5 4inds of (oetry$
a, ecclesiastic ((sal!s)
#, (hiloso(hical (!oral and natural/scientific) li!ited
#y su#2ect
c, fully in+ented (i!itates '&hat should #e) to !o+e
us to +irtuous acts)J
di+ision also #y the!e "enre and for! (+erse or (rose)C
all "enres +irtuous
All other 4inds of 4no&led"e finite B<T
Poetry is !ost 'i!!ediately) !oral ancient uni+ersal
(ane(iste!ic and #est ;*
o (hiloso(her (sullen #orin" untrue)
o historian (#ased on dou#ta#le records #orin"
dated #ound to fact e+en if it is #ad (eaches to the
con+erted)
-efutation of char"es$
a, #etter thin"s to deal &ith
#, '!other of lies)
c, infects us &ith +ice
d, softens u( #ra+ery
e, Plato #anished it
En"lish (oetry is done #adly$
a, no 5 unities
#, fools &rite &ithout culture desi"n or econo!y
*o!ethin" in (oetry !ust re!ain o#scure to !aintain
and reflect its !ystery (;* PlatoHs lo"ic)
Poetry #rin"s i!!ortality and fa!e
E=8<7= B<-KE (EF
th
century)
A Philosophical !n"uir into the #ri$in of #ur !deas of
the %ublime and &eautiful (EL5L)
%!a"ination as creati+e co!#ination of the natural
sensesC distance of re(resentation (ro+ides safety for
conte!(latin" (e+en un(leasant) (heno!ena
aesthetics
%nfluenced #y Lon"inusHs 'On the *u#li!e) (no#le
(assions lead to no#le ele+ated &ritin"
erratic/dan"erous "enius #etter than fla&less !ediocrity)
%nfluence on %!!anuel KantHs ELM6 'riti"ue of the
Po(er of )ud$ment ('!anifold of sensation) filtered
throu"h (re-e@istin" 'cate"ories) to create a, teleolo"ical
and #, aesthetic i,e, i!a"inati+e and non-(ur(oseful
'2ud"!ents) su#li!e not as i!(ortant as #eautiful)
=isad+anta"e of curiosity no+elty$ not selecti+e
su(erficial e@hausti+e childish
other '(o&ers and (assions) needed to en"a"e the
indifferent !ind a&ay fro! #oredo!$
(ain and (leasure 7OT interde(endent$
a, deli"ht is re!o+al of (ain
#, indifference/disa((oint!ent/"rief is the re!o+al of
(leasure
c, (ain or (leasure is (ure and (ositi+e in itself

E, (ain and dan"er (terror) are indi+iduali0ed
e!otions ('self-(reser+ation)) ;* 'society)-
oriented ((u#lic) (assionsC
I, are stron"er than (leasureC
5, and are sources of the su#li!e ('the stron"est
e!otion &hich the !ind is ca(a#le of feelin"))
&hich is (leasant only if +ie&ed fro! an aesthetic
distance
d, I 4inds of (leasura#le society-oriented (assions$
E, 'the society of the se@es) (se@ual intercourse)
I, '"eneral society) (interaction &ith all others)
*<BL%8E
BEAUTIFUL
+ast solid !assi+e s!all li"ht delicate
ru""ed ne"li"ent s!ooth (olished
stron" de+iation fro! rule sli"ht de+iation fro! rule
dar4 and "loo!y #ri"ht
(ain (leasure
3o& does Bur4e "ender-'code) those t&o .ualities1
8asculine Fe!inine
Althou"h di+erse .ualities can #e found in any one
o#2ect hi"h art has all its ele!ents #e of the sa!e nature
(C/c or"anicity)
NEW CRITICISM-FORMALISM
Fro! *o+iet 'factory art) to Cleanth Broo4sHs The
*ell+*rou$ht ,rn (!eanin" %7*%=E for!)
W, Wi!satt and 8, Beardsley$ the intentional fallacy
and the affecti+e fallacy (;* -o!anticis!)
8odernist influence (recourse to !yth/OrientC focus on
te@tual e@(eri!entationC criti.ue of society)
8%K3A%L BAK3T%7
-ussian For!alis!C se!iotician critic (hiloso(her
e@ile
'chronoto(e)
Epic The Novel
finite li!itless
(ast (resent
Elitist #our"eois de!ocratic$
hetero"lossia ('(ri!acy of
conte@t o+er te@t)
(oly"lossia
decoru! the carni+ales.ue$ (arody
ska- the "rotes.ue
!onolo"ic/elitist discourses
or unifor! '%)
dialo"ic nature of lan"ua"e
Fro! Discourse in the .o/el $ 'E(ic and 7o+el) (EM4E)
'*ocial) orientation of criticis! ;* for!al/ideolo"ical
a#stractions
historicosocial 'stylistics of "enre) not indi+idual "enius
defines &or4
old +ie&$ no+el i!(ortant as the!e not as +er#al art
((oetic lan"ua"e #ias)
(oetry (elite do"!atic ideolo"y) ;* no+el (lo&er-class
chaos life dialo"ic (arodic (ole!ic
thatHs &hy traditional stylistics and (hiloso(hy of
lan"ua"e ha+e i"nored hetero"lossia
si"n not fi@ed #ut !ediated #y socio-ideolo"ical
tan"ents$ dialo"ic
&e tend to thin4 of lan"ua"e and the s(ea4er as E-on-E
and ho!o"enous #ecause "reat critics (e,", Aristotle)
conce(tuali0ed of lan"ua"e at !o!ents of centrali0in"
unifyin" centri(etal tendencies historically i!(osedC
ho!o"enous lan"ua"e only O7E strand of hetero"lossic
&hole
unli4e (oetry in no+el no 'authorial) definite lan"ua"e
#ut !any
unli4e dra!a in no+el no narrati+e lan"ua"e outside the
s(eech-action
hetero"lossia har!oni0ed #y unity of te@tual style$
'hi"her unity) (no+el style)
NNNNNNNNN
+arious other discourse ty(es
each also indi+idually styli0ed
dialo"ic effect es(ecially stron" in no+el #ecause of$
a, !ulti(licity of te@tual o#2ect (ideolo"ically !ulti(le
en+iron!ent)
#, literature contains "enres (features of lan"ua"eGai!G
'accent)) (rofessional 2ar"ons social stratification
social/historic for!s of rhetoric
c, its antici(ation of an ans&er
literary a((reciation$ ho& author refracts already-loaded
&ords to e@(ress his/her o&n social ideolo"y
-Why &ould Ba4htinHs &or4 #e found su#+ersi+e1
T,*, EL%OT (early I6
th
century)
8odernist (oet (lay&ri"ht critic essayist
'o#2ecti+e correlati+e) elitis! (Oohn Cro&e -anso!Hs
'old +alues)) critic a trained (rofessional
'!ythical !ethod) ;* !odern decay
'Tradition and the %ndi+idual Talent) (EMEM)
3arold Bloo!Hs The An0iet of !nfluence (EML5)
'criticis! is as ine+ita#le as #reathin")
tradition is erudition culture (7OT i!itation)
the i!(ortance of tradition$
a, #asis for #est &ritin" #y (oets
#, '(resence) of (ast (a chain of lin4s to the (resent)
c, 'ideal order) of tradition "i+es !eanin" to each &or4
P +ice +ersa (art chan"es doesnHt 'i!(ro+e))
d, allo&s us to learn &ell (instead of 'a lot)) the (ast so
as to &rite/2ud"e eclectically
e, facilitates creation as 'a continual e@tinction of
(ersonality) (KeatsHs 'ne"ati+e ca(a#ilityC Tao)
&e !ust critici0e the &or4 ('e@(erience) sti!uli
&or4ed fro! e!otions to (oetic feelin"s) not the (oet
('catalyst))
f, '(oetry isQan esca(e fro! e!otion/(ersonality) (so
tradition hel(s de(ersonali0e critical focus)
MARIST CRITICISM
Karl 8ar@ Das 1apital (EFBL-M4)$
o su(erstructure/#ase theory (=ialectical 8aterialis!)
o relation of (roduct (fetishi0ed co!!odity)-&or4er
(alienated)-ca(italist
o art as carrier of ideolo"y (infor!s and o#scures)
%nfluence on$ Walter Ben2a!in Antonio >ra!sci -ay!ond
Willia!s >eor"y Lu4Rcs Fredric Oa!eson Terry
Ea"leton >ayatri Cha4ra+orty *(i+a4 *tuart 3all,,,
E=8<7= W%L*O7
EM46s socially-infor!ed <,*, 8ar@ist criticis! (;* 7e&
Criticis!Hs elitis!)
The *ound and the &o( (EM4E)
Art as distinct fro! ((olitical) ha((enin"s so offers a +anta"e
(,o,+, for critici0in"-analy0in" life in "eneral
'8ar@is! and Literature)
-a !ore co!(le@ +ie& of 8ar@Hs !odel$ forces in
su(erstructure/#ase &or4 a"ainst/&ith each other and across
the di+ide so ca(ital is 7OT the only deter!inant
-artistic talentS (olitics #ut (olitics can clarify connections
#et&een society and art
-literature #orn out of social conditions (as ideolo"y itself) not
ideolo"ically !ade
-(ro#le! &ith (roletariat culture$
a, yet illiterate not ready to (roduce literature
#, still too influenced #y #our"eois ideolo"y
c, cannot understand ne& discourses
d, !eant to #e traditional reactionary
e, re+olutions donHt (roduce literature
f, canHt (redict future of '(roletariat) literary needs
-authoritati+e control incites in art su#+ersi+e i!(lications
-'infor!ed) control turns art into (arty (ro(a"anda
-literature too co!(le@ clandestine artistic
!icro/!acrono!ic &ith 'carry-o+er +alue) for !ere (olitical
analysis or use as &ea(on (;* -ussian for!alis!D
-"ood (ast culture can #e used to &rite '(eo(leHs) no+els
-e+entually socialist criticis! &ill turn society into a &or4 of
art (transcendence of literature)
LO<%* ALT3<**E-
-3o& indi+idual is for!ed #y 'ideolo"y) of social structures
(>ra!sciHs 'he"e!ony))
- -ole of the 'or"anic intellectual)
'Fro! %deolo"y and %deolo"ical *tate A((aratuses)
-A syste! to #e sustained !ust re(roduce itself &hile it also
(roduces +ia$
a, !an(o&er #, relations of (o&er

technical education the #ase !ust co!(ly
disci(line &a"es %*As to hold u( the
su(erstructureTho&1

i, -e(ressi+e *tate A((s ii, %deolo"ical *tate A((s

Po&er Presti"e (institutions)
<nified 8ulti(le
Pu#lic Pri+ate
;iolence (!ostly) %deolo"y
-art is affected #y ideolo"y #ut real art can critically e@(ose
the %*AsH e@istence thou"h not their inner &or4in"s
class stru""le !ust #e !ainly fou"ht on the %*A field
--*As and %*As secure continuation of relations of
e@(loitation
-each %*A !ana"es an as(ect of relations of (roduction !ost
fa!iliar to it
-%*As dis"uise the!sel+es as natural "od-"i+en #ene+olent
inde(endent of *tate authority
What is %deolo"y1
-'a Ure(resentationH of the i!a"inary relationshi( of indi+iduals
to their real conditions of e@istence)
-for!ed #y socio-historical for!ationsDA ideolo"ies
-For 8ar@ ideolo"y$
a, has no history (does not de+elo( inde(endently li4e
!aterial (ro"ress)
#, is '(ure drea!) (no !ateriality)
-B<T for Althusser ideolo"y$
a, has its o&n history (transfor!ations)
#, is 'o!ni-historical) 'ideolo"y is eternal) its structures
are i!!uta#le li4e the unconscious
c, is 'i!a"inary) #ecause its i!a"inary nature (li4e
Freudian drea!) distorts the re(resentation of realityC itHs
ho& (eo(le ima$ine their relation to relations of
(roduction
d, has a !aterial e@istence #ecause$ i, it e@ists +ia an
a((aratus and ii, affects the indi+idual and (u#lic
#eha+iors codified as (ractices and rituals
e, inter(ellates indi+iduals as su#2ects (constitutes the! and
+ice +ersa)$ su#2ects !ust #e reco"ni0ed/inter(ellated #y
*u#2ect (>od etc,) as uni.ue and concrete indi+iduals
&ithin ideolo"y
I!"e#pell$"io!%
a, is 'al&ays already) (erfor!ed on the su#2ect (e+en #efore
#irth)
#, is a I-&ay !irrorin" (rocess &ith the su#2ect su#2ected
to the *u#2ect
c, "i+es the illusion of free-&illed su#2ection
d, !ust #e !isreco"ni0ed ('!Vconnaissance)) as 'natural)
hence the use of ideolo"y
Wuestion$ =o %*As only e@ist in relation to class stru""le1
Or do &e innately see4 structure in our li+es (as does
Althusser)1
SIGMUND FREUD
*tructure of the !indTthe unconscious
Psychoanalysis ('tal4in" cure)) and resistance to
inter(retation
Literature as a, thera(y (fore(leasure and catharsis)
#, analysis !aterial
c, !a( of hu!an #ein" throu"h 'uni+ersals)
(in '#ad) literature es(eciallyX)
Fi+e sta"es of de+elo(!ent ((ossi#ility of fi@ation)$
Oral (-E)
Anal (-5)
Phallic (-5)Y
Latent (-EE)
>enital ((u#erty-,,,)
YThe Oedi(us co!(le@ (i!(ortance of fa!ily
infantile se@uality 'anato!y is destiny) fear of
castration)
Pleasure (rinci(le$ li#ido death dri+e
The <ncanny re(etition co!(ulsion
5 ta#oos as #asis for ci+ili0ation (Dre(ression)$
!urder incest canni#alis!
=rea!s as 'literature)$ drea!-thou"hts (latent)
+ersus drea!-content (!anifest)
4 !echanis!s of distortion (condensation
dis(lace!ent/transference !echanis!s of
re(resentation editin")
The !nterpretation of Dreams (EM66)
'Creati+e Writers and =aydrea!in") (EM6F)
Totem and Taboo (EMEI)
The 2$o and the !d (EMI5)
;ienna Psychoanalytic *ociety (EM6I)
THE STRUCTURE OF THE HUMAN MIND
SUPER
EGO
ID
EGO
co!&cio'&
&'(co!&cio'&
'!co!&cio'&
li#ido death dri+e
-eality (rinci(le
Th#e&hol) o* co!&cio'&!e&&
Pleasure (rinci(le
F#e')+ ,C#e$"ive W#i"e#& $!) D$-)#e$.i!/0
Concerned &ith (rocess and &riter not &or4/effect
-e!(hasis on (articular indi+idual (;*
su(ra(ersonal)
-creati+e &ritin" cannot #e e@(lained (e@ce(t
#y (ro@y) or du(licated
Ple$&'#e i& No!-Ne/o"i$(le1 Found in$
a, creati+ity of childrenJs i!a"inati+e (lay$
-lin4ed to reality so (lay instead of fantasy
-deter!ined #y &ish to #e "ro&n u( (control)
-unasha!ed o+ert
-natural nor!al
#, adult daydrea!in"$
-not lin4ed to reality so "uilt-free fantasy
-&ish to re+ert to carefree childhood ((leasure)
-asha!ed hidden (re+ealed only in sy!(to!s)
-"enerated #y unsatisfied &ishes (!ale$
a!#itionC fe!ale$ eroticis!)
-if fantasies #eco!e o+er(o&erin"--Zneurosis
c, adult drea!s$
-fantasies !as4ed #y drea! distortion
-sha!eful
d, adult hu!or$
-+er#al e@chan"e for (leasure of (hysical (lay
e, creati+e &ritin"$
-dra&s !aterial fro! reality li4e (lay
-creati+e &riters are li4e daydrea!ers$
i, reali0ed throu"h lan"ua"e/fantasy so$
--there is no "uilt of actual deed
--u"ly e+ents in real life--Z(leasure in art
ii, lin4 o#+ious in chea( (o(ular (;* allusi+e
hi"h#ro&) literature$
--its heroes reflect !ind (rinci(les
(in+inci#le e"o "ood ;* #ad li#ido
!a"netis!)
--all such literature is su!!ed u( as the
sa!e #asic &ish-fulfill!ent catharsis
-elation to ti!e$
-li#ido is !o#ile flo&in" fro! e"o to o#2ects
-'date !ar4) for fantasies
-creati+e &or4 !o+es fro! (resentsti!ulus to
(ast ori"in of affect to future &ish fulfill!ent$
Past Present Future
childhood !e!ory sti!ulus &ish-fantasy
-elation to reader$
-secret of art$ the chan"e of re(ulsion to&ards
re+elation of sha!eful &ish into (leasure$
i, #y alterin" dis"uisin" reality throu"h use of
'innocuous) &ords/fiction con+ention
ii, #y identifyin" &ith the hero readers freely
(artici(ate in the fantasy &ithout any actual "uilt
iii, aestheric incenti+e #onus or 'fore(leasure) of
literary lan"ua"e #efore !eanin" en"a"es us
dee(er
2AC3UES LACAN 45675-56859
Co!#ines$
a, anthro(olo"y$ Claude Le+i-*trauss[s
structuralis!
#, lin"uistics$ Ferdinard de *aussure[s
*i"nified/si"nifier
c, (sycholo"y$ the Oedi(al-lin"uistic
de+elo(!ent
--\ fear of the Phallus\
--\La& of the Father\C \7a!e of the Father\
--((sycholin"uistics)C focus on structure of
the unconscious
"he '!co!&cio'& i& ('il":li;e $ l$!/'$/e%
a, !eanin" created in connections/ relations
a!on" si"nifieds not in each ite! alone
#, dis(laced si"nifier (Oac.ues =errida)
\%\ as socially-constructed throu"h
lan"ua"e$
a, identifyin" &ith others society--Adou#lin"
#, idea of unified sufficient self--Anarcissis!
c, fra"!ented su#2ect$ i, dialectic \%\
ii, unified \self\
\Kno& Thyself\ an i!(ossi#ility
-\E\ al&ays a hidden (er(etually-deferred */
2AC3UES LACAN
,The Mi##o# S"$/e $& Fo#.$"ive o* "he F'!c"io! o* "he I
A& Reve$le) i! P&-cho$!$l-"ic E<pe#ie!ce0
We understand the self not #ecause &e thin4 #ut #ecause
&e are si"nified (throu"h !irrorin")
8irror sta"e sets relation #et&een su#2ects and reality
(the -eal is non-a((roacha#le)
%dentification Da, su#2ect is i!a"o
fictional/%deal % (!irror sta"e)
D #, su#2ect throu"h dialectical identifyin"
&ith others ((ost-!irror sta"e lan"ua"e)
li#idinal nor!ali0ation/ social %
&e learn to act not instincti+ely #ut throu"h
consultation &ith ac4no&led"!ent of othersH +ie&
;* e@istential e"o-autono!y$ su#2ect not at &ar
&ith society #ut defined #y it
=ou#le self created #ecause$
a, &e are #orn &ith de+elo(ed #rain (re!ature #ody
our fantasies run to&ards an ideal a#le self (shell)
!irror i!a"e &hole ('(er!anence of %)) ;*
#, su#2ectHs e@(erience of self as dis2ointed li!#s and
i!(ulses ('fra"!ented #ody)C '%) other than 'self))
seen in drea!s hysteria schi0o(hrenia
8eanin" of #eauty$
a, 'ho!eo!or(hic identification) &ith it (&e identify
&ith others #ecause &e see (art of oursel+es in the!)
#, desire it (as otherness (erfection)
for literature this e@(lains (leasure of !i!esis
FEMINISM
5 &a+es$
a, EL
th
-EM
th
century$ &o!enHs suffra"e ;* (atriarchy
se@is! chau+inis!
#, !id-I6
th
century$ se@ ;* "ender
essentialis!/#iolo"is! ;* 'Wo!an does not e@ist)
(Oulia Kriste+a) &o!an ;* &o!en French (Kriste+a-
3Vl]ne Ci@ous-Luce %ri"aray) ;* A!erican fe!inis!
(Toril 8oi Elaine *ho&alterHs "ynocriticis! Alice
Wal4erHs Wo!anis!)
'Fe!ale)Fe!inineFe!inistFe!ale (self-
defined)
c, late I6
th
century$ Oudith ButlerHs (erfor!ati+ity
(3ender Trouble EMM6) *usan Bordo '.ueer) and
"ender studies ;* (hallo"ocentris!
;%->%7%A WOOLF
7o+elist essayist fe!inist 'Bloo!s#ury Circle)
3o"arth Press (&ith hus#and Leonard)
4 3uineas (EM5F)$ relation of (atriarchy to !ilitaris! to
ca(italist control of &o!en
A Room of #ne5s #(n (EMIM)
Cha(ter %$ 'one !inor (ointTa &o!an !ust ha+e !oney
and a roo! of her o&n if she is to &rite fiction)$
financial institutional ideolo"ical !ani(ulation of
&o!en
Cha(ter %%%$ 'Oudith) *ha4es(eare$ &hy is there no "reat
&o!en &ritersH canon1 '>enius) socially cataly0ed
Cha(ter ;$ 'Chloe Li4ed Oli+ia)T"endered self-
reflection autono!ous &o!enHs e@istence ;* 'di+ide
and con.uer) !otif i!(act of !aterial conditions
Cha(ter ;%$ 'Andro"yny) as a (recondition for a "reat
literary !ind (EMLL *andra BernHs *e@ -ole %n+entory)
*A7=-A >%LBE-T A7= *<*A7 ><BA-
The 6ad(oman in the Attic (EMLM)
-Pro#le! &o!en &riters face$
a, no su((ort alone
#, no tradition
c, !ale critical (ole!ic
d, 'infection) #y !ale ideas lan"ua"e !odels tools
(3arold Bloo!Hs 'an@iety of influence) dou#led)
e, if tradition then 'dis-eased) !ad&o!en or !onsters
or an"els ()ane 2re e@a!(le)$ '"hostly) trace in
&ritin" of hel(lessness hysteria anore@ia
a"ora(ho#ia self-denial #ein" 'fashiona#ly ill)
'dis!e!#er!ent)
&o!en authors need 'sisterhood) solidarity
deci(herin" of (ast +oices of su#+ersion fe!ale
su#culture o(enin" of the canon and its te@tualities
(herstory "ynocriticis! "ynocentris! 're-!e!#erin")
lost !others in lit)
E@a!(le$ Alice Wal4erHs '%n *earch of Our 8othersH
>ardens) (EMF5)
FEMINISMS II-III
3^L_7E C%`O<*
I
nd
&a+e French fe!inis! (after *i!one de Beau+oirHs
EM4M The %econd %e0)
Pri+ile"in"/cele#ratin" of the fe!ale-!aternal
(essentialis!1)
^criture fe!inine ;* (hallo"ocentris!
'The Lau"h of the 8edusa) (EML5)
-'&o!an !ust &rite herself)/her #ody sho& secret
creati+e eroticis!
-&o!an as !ulti(le fluid sensory hetero"enous ti!eless
#ountiful disru(ti+e (layful natural e@(losi+e
-!ust reco"ni0e tra( of (hallo"ocentris!$
a, sto( definin"/defeatin" herself
#, se@is! is historicosocial not natural #ad for !en too
-se@ed &ritin" (lo"os ;* Vcriture fe!inine)$ (oetry as
fe!inine esca(e fro! re(resentation into son"
-#enefits of &o!enHs &ritin"$
a, freein" herself
#, disru(tion of sy!#olic econo!y history
c, lo+in" the (other) &o!an in her (;* di+ide P
con.uer)
d, e@(lore the '#ise@uality) (e@chan"e o(enness) of
&ritin" (&o!an as already #ise@ual not castrated
lac4in" or dar4 8edusa)
e, o((ose (atriarchal theory (e+olution of se@is!)
f, !a4e a re+olution for all 'others)
", e@(erience (self-)+alue of '(re"nancy) of ideas
O<=%T3 B<TLE-
*tarts 5
rd
&a+e fe!inis! &ith 3ender Trouble (EMM6)
Po&er not as !asculine/fe!inine #ut creator of #inary
fra!es their constituti+e science (heteronor!ati+ity)
'(olitical construction of identity)
>ender$
'is a 4ind of (ersistent i!(ersonation that (asses as the
real,)
'a style of the flesh) 'styli0ed re(etition of acts)
((erfor!ati+ity of "ender/se@/identity)
A #ody is$
a, culturally ((re)defined #y not 'natural) surface for
si"nification
#, synecdoche for any cultural construct/ social syste!
c, a surface defined so as to create the illusion of de(th
(lac4 as (resenceT9#o@ !eta(hor:)
d, defined as self #y e@clusion/creation of the Other$
'Others #eco!e shit,)
e, 'That the "endered #ody is (erfor!atie su""ests that it
has no ontolo"ical status a(art fro! the +arious acts
&hich constitute its reality)
*u#+ersi+e #odily acts$ (only trou#lin") dra" (arody
"litches durin" the re(etition (rocessresi"nification
.ueerin"
-ACE A7= POSTCOLONIALISM
The conce(t of 'race) as artificial cultural construct
HENRY LOUIS GATES 2R1
8i@ of deconstruction and African(-A!erican) tradition (+ernacular
orality the!es)DA 'cultural tolerance) and interaction #et&een theory and
(ractice
E@a!ination and sho&casin" of stron" ethnic e@a!(les efforts
'Tal4in" Blac4$ Critical *i"ns of the Ti!es)
The 'dou#le #ind) in the e@a!(le of Ale@ander Cru!!ell$
=enial of African(-A!erican) intellectuality O-
Ca(itulation to '&hite) literature and theory
--A&hite culture +ie&ed &ith sus(icion hostility #y #lac4 (o(ulous
--A#lac4 literature for!ed as a reaction to racis! not for 'aesthetic)
(ur(oses
--A'-ace is a te@t (an array of discursi+e (ractices) not an essence) (>ates
I4IM),
>atesHs a((roach$
a, '% ha+e tried to &or4 throu"h conte!(orary theories of literature not to
Ua((lyH the! to #lac4 te@ts #ut to transfor! #y translatin" the! into a ne&
rhetorical real!Tto re-create throu"h re+ision the critical theory at hand)
(>ates I4IM),
#, =efa!iliari0ation (throu"h deconstruction) a &ay to transcend
stereoty(ical readin"s of #lac4 te@ts and "et to their for!al (rinci(les and
identify the! (a (olitical act),
--A'Blac4 Theory) as a (ositi+e not ne"ati+e "esture
((ost)colonialis! df, E5
th
-EM
th
century
'Otherness) "lo#ali0ation ("lo#al +illa"e "local ;*
8acdonaldi0ation ne& i!(erialis!)
E=WA-= *A%=
Palestinian-<,*, intellectual theorist acti+ist
The *orld7 the Te0t and the 'ritic (EMF5)$ te@ts as
'&orldly)
'Fro! #rientalism ) (EMLF)
-df,$ the Orient constructed #y Euro(eans as the WestHs
'contrastin" i!a"e)
-a((lications$ a
a, acade!ic disci(line
#, onto-e(iste!olo"ical 'style of thou"ht)
c, 'cor(orate institution for dealin" &ith the Orient)
(EF
th
century French-British colonial do!ination)
d, Western cultural con+ention (follo&ed #y <*A)$ 'a
distribution of "eo(olitical a&areness into aesthetic
scholarlyQte@ts) ((roducti+e)
e, (o&er "a!e (A, >ra!sciHs 'he"e!ony))
f, dura#le theory &ith (re+ious reference cor(us
!aterial a((lications and (olitical #enefits
", re(resentation rather than truth/lie
h, a (ersonal in+est!ent on self-4no&led"e ;*
(ro(a"anda/stereoty(es of 'Orientals)
-#ased on the idea of Euro(ean su(re!acy
-de#un4s !yth of '(ure) science/hu!anis!/aesthetics
-seen +ia$
a, strate"ic location (fro! author to ideolo"ical cor(us)
#, strate"ic for!ation (fro! ideolo"y to author)
>A?AT-% C3AK-A;O-T? *P%;AK
Postcolonialist deconstructionist 8ar@ist fe!inist theorist
and =errida translator
'Can the *u#altern *(ea41) (EMF5/MM)
-=fs, *u#altern
-I o((osite difficulties in su#alternHs 's(ea4in")$
a, silenced s(o4en for as 'Other) onlyC co-
o(ted/adulterated if it assu!es do!inant discourse
#, unheard !isunderstood if usin" its o&n discourse
only ethical (osition$ hauntin" of the su#alternHs 'trace)
o(enness fle@i#ility
CULTURAL THEORY
-Cultural criticis!$ reci(rocal relation of te@t to culture
-i!!ensity of field !ulti(le disci(linary a((roaches
-Cultural !aterialis! (Terry Ea"leton) 7e& 3istoricis!
(*te(hen >reen#latt)
8%C3EL FO<CA<LT
-((ost)structuralist 7e& 3istoricist .ueer theorist-acti+ist
-;,%,PX
-'"enealo"ical) +ie& of so-called i!!anent/natural
institutions (The &irth of Prison)
-su#2ects 'created) #y institutions that !ana"e the! (The
8istor of %e0ualit)
-'Po&er/4no&led"e) (no Truth 2ust discourses)
'UThe CarceralH fro! Discipline and Punish ) (EML5)
-o#ser+ation (infor!ation)su(er+isiontrainin"
(docility)control (i!(rison!ent #y socio(olitical
institutions)
-e@a!(le of the carceral
- "ro&in" circles of (o&er/4no&led"e net&or4s$
'nor!ali0ation of nor!ali0ation)
- #lurrin" of sin/!adness/cri!e/i"norance after EF
th
c,$
soul / !ind / #ody/ intellect finances
Church/asylu!/(rison/school as one ("radation
continuu!)
-no 'outside) the la& (la& '(roduces)/includes cri!e)
-the carceral as '(roducti+e) (o&er (2o#s sciences etc)
-e$ te@t$ is it i!(risoned1 =oes it i!(rison1
'What %s an Author1)
--es(onse to Barthes
-hu!anistic +ie&$ author as an or"ani0in" "rou(in" de+ice for
4indred-style &or4s s/he !a4es and i!(rints &ith indi+idual self
-B<T$
a, historically (rior to E5
th
century te@ts !ostly anony!ous
#, today &e +alori0e/re!e!#er only certain 4inds of authors (e,",
literature +s la&C (ast scientists &ere na!ed authors not no&)
--AWhat (o&ers re"ulate (roduction and +alori0ation1
--AWhat (ositions/relationshi(s can an author assu!e1
Today &ritin" defined as te@t-#ased "a!e of si"nifyin"
trans"ressions (C/c Barthes)
--Ate@t does not "i+e i!!ortality #ut 4ills hi!/her #ecause of$
i, real-life hardshi(s of authorshi(
ii, 7iet0schean s(ara"!os
iii, o#literation in te@tTauthor re(laced #y '&or4)
(Pro#le!atic ter!$ &hose &or41 3o& !any &or4s does it ta4e to
!a4e an author1)
i+, authorial (ersona/nom de plume different than real (erson
+, 'initiators of discursi+e (ractices) (theoreticians etc)
different than 'transdiscursi+e) (homo uni/ersalis) authors
(+i, dissolution of author as (erson in technolo"ical !eans of
(roduction$ (refi"ures We#LitX)
ANDREW ROSS
7?< sociolo"ist and cultural studies "uruC social/la#or acti+ist
Fro! !atters of literature (o( culture and intellectual status (.o
Respect) to criti.ue of (acade!ic) la#or relations (.o+'ollar7
'reditocrac)
E!(irical yet theoretically-sa++y 'scholarly re(ortin") !ethod
'The 8ental La#or Pro#le!)
Theories on &hy cultural la#or is de+alued$
a, The 'cultural discount)$
-intellectuals and artists trained to #e disinterested in !oney
(refer lo+e of +ocation and creati+ity instead sacrifice for the
"ood of society
-intellectuals donHt &ant to #e called '&or4ers)
-!yth of the (enniless artist raises their +alue so syste! that
e@(loits the! ((u#lishers uni+ersities) &ishes to !aintain
the! disinterested/(oor
-threat of su#stitute 2o#less (ool #rain&ashed /olunteer ar!y
of ad2uncts
-cor(orati+e ad!inistration of uni+ersities e@(loits ad2uncts
cuts costs o((oses la#or unions
-annul!ent of teachin" #onds +ia online courses
(de(ersonali0ation thus de(rofessonali0ation of &e# in(ut
&or4Te," Wi4i(edia)
-#ohe!ian .ualities that !a4e acade!ic la#or desira#le
(fle@i#ility creati+e lo+e casual &or4 isolation 'no
+acation) self-!ana"e!ent '(ure) research) e@(loited #y
cor(orate culture to (roduce o+er&or4ed under(aid 2o#-
insecure &or4ers
-cultural ata+is!$ todayHs no-collar artists/teachers still
treated as EM
th
-century su#2ects of (atrona"e/rich dilettantes
or throu"h leftist standards of &hite-collar -o!anticis!
(different for !inorities &ho resist +oluntary (o+erty)
-nefarious 2o# !ana"e!ent$ syste! o+erad+erti0es and
o+er(roduces hi"hly-s4illed colle"e "raduates so that it can
e@(loit their need for (co!(arati+ely fe&er) decent 2o#s
#, The 'cost disease)
-(!yth of) technolo"ical (roducti+ity doesnHt a((ly to
!ental/creati+e la#or
-arts/hu!anities (ushed to 2ustify their role throu"h 'social
acti+ities/#enefits) (funded only under strict su(er+ision)
*u""estions$
a, reco"ni0e the shift fro! dilettante to &or4er
#, unioni0eX
POSTMODERNISM
--eaction a"ainst !odernist rules 'o#2ecti+e correlati+e)
authenticity (as Authority) elitis! (+s (o( culture)
-%nfluence of (uncontrolla#le) +irtual technolo"y
"lo#ali0ation theories of te@tuality
-!i@ colla"e re-creation (arody nothin" '(ure)
OEA7-F-A7bO%* L?OTA-=
-'inco!!ensurate) differences of local syste!s
di+ersity recyclin" '(astiche) +s '>rand 7arrati+es)
'=efinin" the Post!odern) (EMFB)
-#ricola"e +s architecture unifor!ity idea of '(ro"ress)
-the trau!a of !odernity (no '!a4e it ne&) #ut re(ressed
#ut unresol+ed (ast)
-(ost!odernis! as healin"/i!a"inati+e re-construction of
(ast (FreudHs 'ana!nesis) te@t no& a real! of e.ual
routes)
-'locali0in") (C/c FoucaultHs 'or"anic)) theory$ no holistic
theory can li#erate hu!an4ind
-OLA7= BA-T3E*
- ;%P se!iotician reader-res(onse criticis!
-%/9 6tholo$ies The Pleasure of the Te0t
-influenced #y Oac.ues Lacan$
a, !eanin" found not in se!antic units #ut in
codes/relations #et&een the!
#, art as a creati+e re-settin" of a "i+en relational synta@
#et&een conce(ts/o#2ects
c, !eanin" deri+ed only fro! te@tual lan"ua"e endlessly
s(readin" its si"nifyin" (otential ('(lay) +s
"i+en/fi@ed assu!(tions of inter(retation)
d, the '(leasure of the te@t) is in the 'sea!s) #et&een
(otentialities of !eanin"
'The =eath of the Author)
-c/c sa!e te@t #y Foucault
-old +ie& of the Author$
(ast of te@t +s scri(t act of 'eternal no&)
!aster of characters &orld
artisan O- ins(ired !ediu! for the 8use
source of definiti+e !eanin" of te@t
-lost su#2ecti+ity of ori"in of te@t (not '&or4 #y))
-&e canHt e@(lain a &or4 #y its Author-ity
-historical (recedent$ e!(hasis on narrati+e (#ard +s 8use)
+s i!!ediate indi+idual o&nershi( of te@t
-al&ays (re-e@istin" !ulti+alence of si"n-field
-al&ays ne& cultural relations
-eader not author is the a"ent &ho #rin"s all
(e@tra)te@tual ele!ents to"ether
DECONSTRUCTION AND POSTSTRUCTURALISM
-The uncertainty/(er!ea#ility of all structures centers
ori"ins teleolo"ies '+iolent hierarchies) '#orders)
('a(oria))
-The uncertainty of the si"n (diff:rance) &hen e+erythin" is
te@t (each te@t has (oints of tension &hich let it deconstruct
itself)
-no 'transcendental si"nified) only su((le!ent trace
-Criti.ue of theory ('(osition) instead of stance)
a, attac4 on 'lo"ocentris!) ('Western !eta(hysics))
#, deconstructi+e '(ose) ((uns irony (arody)
OACW<E* =E--%=A
#f 3rammatolo$ (EMBL) +s the historical (ri!acy of oral
discourse o+er &ritin"
the dou#le !eanin" of '(har!a4on) (PlatoHs
Phaedrus)
'*tructure *i"n and Play in the =iscourse of the 3u!an
*ciences) (EMBB)
-#ased on *aussureHs */s as only difference
-E+ery structure su((orted #y a 'center) a fi@ed ori"in$
su#stitution sto(s there se!antic (lay li!ited
-center not su#2ect to structuralitycenter not (art of
structure 'outside) it center is not a center structure
#ased on an 'a#yss)
-entire Western !eta(hysics is a search for a center
lac4 of center allo&s infinite (lay of su#stitutions
('the transcendental si"nified is ne+er a#solutely (resent
outside a syste! of differences))
--eco"nition of de-centerin" leads to ru(ture of e(iste!e
(since 7iet0sche Freud 3eide""er)C #ut still &e canHt
esca(e
a, the !eta(hysics-oriented discourse it uses
#, lan"ua"e (the ar#itrary si"n) in "eneral
-(lay of si"nification doesnHt lead to total destruction of
!eanin" ethics #ut &e !ust #e$
a, res(ons(e)i#le
#, attuned to self-deconstructi+e strea4 in lan"ua"e
--esults$
a, de-centerin" of ethnocentris!ethnolo"y studies
#, deconstruction of o((ositions #y i, historici0in"
i!!anent conce(ts ('ste( outside (hiloso(hy)) ii,
reco"ni0in" e!(irical li!its of old discourse that
&e still use (e+en to turn it a"ainst itself)
c, #ricoleur of discourse re(laces en"ineer !yth
(al&ays relati+e use of conce(ts +alues)
d, !ytho!or(hic discourse re(laces e(iste!ic one
(tenuous e(iste!olo"y tan"led !aterial)
e, acce(tance that si"nifyin" field is untotali0a#le
7OT #ecause it is ine@hausti#le #ut #ecause it is
'finite) (no center allo&s (lay of su#stitutions)
su((le!entarity (su((ly/su((lant)$ the e@tra is
al&ays added to the structure/syste!
-Possi#le ris4$ if &e deconstruct e,", history &e !ay fall
#ac4 into the tra( of !eta(hysics of Bein"/(resence as
ahistorical (i,e, another totali0in" (hiloso(hy)
-We can either yearn fore+er for the ori"inal si"n or acce(t
the 7iet0shean (lay #eyond hu!anis! O- e@(lore the yet-
unna!ea#le diffVrance of these !utually e@clusi+e choices,