April 2025 - Page 4 of 7 - English Studies

“Childhood” by Frances Cornford: A Critical Analysis

“Childhood” by Frances Cornford, first appeared in her 1910 poetry collection Poems, is brief yet poignant verse reflecting upon the innocent misconceptions of childhood, especially the idea that adults choose their aging traits as marks of dignity or grandeur.

Introduction: “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

“Childhood” by Frances Cornford, first appeared in her 1910 poetry collection Poems, is brief yet poignant verse reflecting upon the innocent misconceptions of childhood, especially the idea that adults choose their aging traits as marks of dignity or grandeur. The poem’s main idea centers on the sudden, quiet realization that aging is not a choice but a condition of helplessness, mirroring the vulnerability of youth. Cornford captures a moment of revelation through the child’s eyes, as the speaker watches her great-aunt’s friend fumble for scattered beads—an image that symbolically shatters the illusion of adult invincibility. The poem remains popular for its simplicity, emotional clarity, and universal theme of growing up and recognizing the frailty of age. Critics have praised it for its economy of language and the evocative contrast between the imagined power of adulthood and the quiet truth of human frailty (Cornford, F., 1910, Poems, London: Bowes & Bowes).

Text: “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

I used to think that grown-up people chose
To have stiff backs and wrinkles round their nose,
And veins like small fat snakes on either hand,
On purpose to be grand.
Till through the banisters I watched one day
My great-aunt Etty’s friend who was going away,
And how her onyx beads had come unstrung.
I saw her grope to find them as they rolled;
And then I knew that she was helplessly old,
As I was helplessly young.

Annotations: “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

Line	Simple Explanation	Literary Devices
I used to think that grown-up people chose 🧠👩‍🦳	The speaker believed adults wanted to look and act like grown-ups.	Tone: Innocent misunderstanding, Past Reflection
To have stiff backs and wrinkles round their nose, 🧍‍♂️➰👃	She thought adults chose to have bad posture and wrinkles.	Imagery, Hyperbole
And veins like small fat snakes on either hand, 🐍✋	She imagined the hand veins of adults as fat, squiggly snakes.	Simile, Visual Imagery
On purpose to be grand. 🎩✨	She believed adults did all that to look important or dignified.	Irony, Child’s logic
Till through the banisters I watched one day 👀🚪	One day, she secretly peeked through a staircase railing.	Symbolism (banisters = divide), First-person POV
My great-aunt Etty’s friend who was going away, 👵👜	She saw an old woman visiting her aunt, getting ready to leave.	Character Reference, Setup
And how her onyx beads had come unstrung. 📿💥	The necklace broke, and the black beads scattered everywhere.	Symbolism (life unraveling), Metaphor
I saw her grope to find them as they rolled; 🤲🔍	She watched the woman fumble to pick up the fallen beads.	Pathos, Visual Imagery
And then I knew that she was helplessly old, 🧓💔	In that moment, she realized the woman was truly weak and old.	Contrast, Climax
As I was helplessly young. 👶🔄👵	She connected the woman’s fragility with her own as a child.	Juxtaposition, Antithesis, Paradox

Literary And Poetic Devices: “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

🔤 Device (with Symbol)	📝 Example from the Poem	💬 Simple Explanation
🅰️ Alliteration 🔊	“fat snakes”	Repetition of the same consonant sound to create rhythm and emphasis.
🅰️ Assonance 🎶	“chose / nose”	Repetition of vowel sounds in nearby words to enhance musical quality.
📚 Climax 🔝💡	“And then I knew…”	The moment of realization or turning point in the poem.
⚖️ Contrast 🧓👶	Old age vs. youth	Shows how both the old woman and child experience helplessness.
🎭 Enjambment ➡️📝	Across multiple lines	Continuation of a sentence without a pause across lines creates flow.
👁️ First-Person Narration 🗣️	“I used to think…”	Story told from a personal memory, creating intimacy.
🎩 Hyperbole 🤯📣	“small fat snakes”	Exaggerated comparison to reflect a child’s dramatic imagination.
🎨 Imagery 👃🖼️	“wrinkles round their nose”	Vivid description appeals to the reader’s senses.
🎲 Innocent Misunderstanding 🙃👧	“chose to have stiff backs”	Shows the naive thinking of a child about grown-ups.
🌈 Irony 😅🎩	“on purpose to be grand”	Child mistakenly thinks adults want to age to look fancy.
⚖️ Juxtaposition 👵👶	“helplessly old” vs. “helplessly young”	Places two ideas side by side to highlight contrast.
🧵 Metaphor 🔗💫	Onyx beads = life unraveling	Compares unspoken ideas directly without “like” or “as.”
📝 Memoir/Reflective Style 🕰️📜	Entire poem	Told from memory; reflects on a childhood moment with adult insight.
🎭 Paradox ❓⚖️	“helplessly old / helplessly young”	Contradictory statement that reveals a deeper truth.
💔 Pathos 😢💞	“I saw her grope…”	Evokes sadness or empathy for the elderly woman.
🔁 Reflection 🧠✨	Entire tone and voice	Looking back from the present to understand the past.
🔗 Setting as Symbol 🚪👀	“through the banisters”	The banister represents a boundary between child and adult worlds.
🪞 Simile 🐍	“veins like small fat snakes”	Compares veins to snakes using “like” for vivid effect.
🎭 Symbolism 📿💥	Onyx beads = fragility of old age	One thing stands in for something deeper or abstract.
🎶 Tone 🧠✨	Innocent, reflective	The poem’s attitude—wondering, innocent, quietly emotional.

Themes: “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

🌱 Innocence and Naivety

In “Childhood“ by Frances Cornford, the speaker’s youthful misunderstanding of adulthood reveals a central theme of innocence and naivety.
The poem begins with the line “I used to think that grown-up people chose / To have stiff backs and wrinkles round their nose,” which encapsulates a child’s imaginative logic. The idea that adults want wrinkles or choose to have stiff backs shows the speaker’s innocent detachment from the biological realities of aging. This childlike interpretation of adulthood is both amusing and touching, emphasizing how children often make sense of the world through simplified, sometimes magical reasoning. The poem captures a moment of mental transition—from seeing adults as mysterious and self-fashioned, to recognizing the truth of human frailty.

🧓 Aging and Physical Decline

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, the physical effects of aging are observed through a child’s eyes, establishing the theme of bodily decline with quiet poignancy.
Lines such as “veins like small fat snakes on either hand” and “stiff backs” use vivid imagery to show the physical transformation that comes with age. The metaphor comparing veins to snakes is especially telling, as it reflects both fascination and a slight sense of horror. The most moving example is when the speaker describes “how her onyx beads had come unstrung” and the elderly woman “groped to find them as they rolled.” This moment reveals the woman’s helplessness, signaling not just a loss of control over objects, but symbolically over time and physical stability. The poem subtly evokes empathy by highlighting aging as a shared, inescapable part of life.

👁️ Realization and Growing Awareness

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, the speaker undergoes a small but profound moment of realization, shifting the theme from innocence to growing awareness.
The line “And then I knew that she was helplessly old, / As I was helplessly young” marks a turning point. It’s here that the speaker sees, perhaps for the first time, that adulthood isn’t about grandeur or choice, but about vulnerability—just like childhood. This shift from misperception to understanding is subtle but powerful. The parallel use of the word “helplessly” shows that both ends of life share a lack of control, uniting the child and the elder in a human continuum. This moment encapsulates the bittersweet nature of growing up: not just learning facts, but gaining emotional insight into others’ realities.

🎭 Perception vs. Reality

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, a strong theme is the gap between how things appear and how they truly are—between perception and reality.
The speaker first believes that adults intentionally make themselves look older to appear “grand.” This whimsical belief—“on purpose to be grand”—represents how children often misinterpret adult behavior. But this imagined version of adult dignity collapses when the child sees the woman struggle to pick up her beads. The poetic transition from admiration to disillusionment is gentle, yet effective. Through this shift, Cornford shows how our understanding of the world often changes with experience and observation. What once seemed magical or majestic is revealed to be ordinary, flawed, or even pitiable—yet all the more human for it.

Literary Theories and “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

📘 Literary Theory	🔍 Application to the Poem	📌 Relevant Lines or Concepts
👶 Childhood Studies / Developmental Theory	Explores how the poem reflects a child’s way of thinking and developing understanding about adulthood. Shows the contrast between the imaginative logic of children and the reality they later grasp.	“I used to think that grown-up people chose / To have stiff backs…” shows a naïve explanation of aging.
🔍 Psychoanalytic Theory 🧠	Focuses on subconscious realizations, emotional development, and symbolic meaning (like the beads as loss of control). The shift from fantasy to awareness mirrors stages of psychological maturity.	The moment of realization: “And then I knew that she was helplessly old / As I was helplessly young.”
🕰️ New Historicism 🧭	Considers the historical context—how aging, class, and respectability (like “onyx beads”) were perceived in early 20th-century British society, especially by children within traditional families.	“On purpose to be grand” implies how class and image were associated with age and dignity.
🔄 Reader-Response Theory 📖	Centers on how readers interpret the speaker’s growing awareness emotionally. A young reader may relate to confusion, while an adult sees it as poignant or nostalgic.	Entire poem depends on the reader’s empathy and shared memory of misunderstanding adulthood.

🧠 Summary:

Each theory brings a new lens to “Childhood”:

Childhood Studies emphasizes innocence and cognitive development 👶

Psychoanalysis unlocks deeper emotional and symbolic meanings 🧠
New Historicism places the poem within its cultural moment 🕰️
Reader-Response invites us to reflect on our own memories 📖

Critical Questions about “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

❓What does “Childhood” by Frances Cornford reveal about how children perceive adulthood?

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, the poem illustrates that children often perceive adulthood through a lens of fantasy, misunderstanding, and symbolic association.
The speaker recalls thinking that adults “chose / To have stiff backs and wrinkles round their nose,” which shows how children project intention onto things they don’t understand. This belief that aging is a deliberate choice “on purpose to be grand” captures a child’s limited framework, where unfamiliar experiences are filled in with imagination. Rather than seeing age as biological, the child sees it as performance or costume. This misunderstanding is not just humorous but deeply revealing—it shows how developmental limitations in children affect how they interpret the world around them, and how innocence shields them from reality until experience alters that view.

❓How does “Childhood” by Frances Cornford use imagery to show the vulnerability of old age?

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, vivid imagery is employed to evoke the frailty and helplessness of aging.
The poem uses visual comparisons like “veins like small fat snakes” and “wrinkles round their nose” to emphasize the physical marks of old age. These aren’t neutral descriptions—they reflect the child’s perception of aged bodies as strange or even grotesque. But the emotional core of the imagery comes in the scene where “her onyx beads had come unstrung,” and the woman “groped to find them as they rolled.” The beads here symbolize more than jewelry—they represent loss of control, dignity, and the unraveling of physical independence. The helplessness of the woman’s actions parallels the speaker’s own helpless youth, creating a mirrored vulnerability that is both tender and sobering.

❓How does the speaker’s realization in “Childhood” by Frances Cornford shape the poem’s emotional arc?

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, the speaker’s realization—that adults are not grand but vulnerable—forms the emotional climax of the poem.
The line “And then I knew that she was helplessly old / As I was helplessly young” signals a profound shift in awareness. Until this point, the speaker viewed adults as powerful, mysterious figures who embraced physical signs of age for status. But the quiet, unspectacular moment of watching the old woman struggle with fallen beads alters everything. The use of the word “helplessly” for both old age and childhood connects the speaker’s own position to the woman’s, creating emotional symmetry. This shared helplessness reshapes the tone—from innocent amusement to reflective sadness—and conveys the universal truth that vulnerability spans all stages of life.

❓What role does symbolism play in “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, particularly with the image of the onyx beads?

In “Childhood” by Frances Cornford, the broken onyx beads act as a central symbol for the fragility of aging and the collapse of illusion.
Onyx beads, often associated with formality and elegance, appear to be symbols of the dignity and grandeur the child once attributed to adults. When the beads “had come unstrung” and roll across the floor, that elegance is literally and figuratively dismantled. The woman’s struggle to “grope to find them” underlines the loss of control and grace. The moment is small but deeply metaphorical: just as the necklace unravels, so too does the speaker’s illusion of adulthood as a choice or performance. Through this single, quiet act, Cornford invites the reader to reflect on how everyday objects can represent profound emotional and existential truths.

Literary Works Similar to “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

🌱 “Fern Hill” by Dylan Thomas
Both poems reflect on childhood with nostalgic reverence, highlighting the beauty and loss of innocence over time.

👶 “The Toys” by Coventry Patmore
Like Cornford’s poem, it centers on childhood misunderstanding and emotional vulnerability, showing a parent’s later regret and tenderness.
👓 “In the Waiting Room” by Elizabeth Bishop
This poem also captures a sudden moment of realization from a child’s perspective, blending confusion, identity, and the mysteries of growing up.
🎭 “The Old Familiar Faces” by Charles Lamb
Shares a quiet, reflective tone and explores memory, loss, and the transition from youthful perception to mature sorrow.

🪞 “Once Upon a Time” by Gabriel Okara
Okara contrasts childhood sincerity with adult pretense, much like Cornford’s subtle critique of grown-up “grandeur” and lost authenticity.

Representative Quotations of “Childhood” by Frances Cornford

🔖 Quotation	📍 Context in Poem	🧠 Theoretical Perspective (in Bold)
🧠 “I used to think that grown-up people chose”	Introduces the child’s misunderstanding of adulthood as something voluntarily performed.	Childhood Studies / Developmental Theory
🧍‍♂️ “To have stiff backs and wrinkles round their nose,”	Reflects how children notice visible signs of age and assume adults choose them.	Psychoanalytic Theory
🐍 “And veins like small fat snakes on either hand,”	Vivid simile representing how a child sees unfamiliar bodily features with exaggerated imagery.	Reader-Response Theory
🎩 “On purpose to be grand.”	Shows the child’s belief that aging is a display of status and elegance.	New Historicism
👀 “Till through the banisters I watched one day”	Describes the moment of secret observation that triggers a turning point.	Feminist / Spatial Theory
📿 “And how her onyx beads had come unstrung.”	Symbolic event where physical elegance is lost, representing the unraveling of illusion.	Symbolic / Psychoanalytic Theory
🤲 “I saw her grope to find them as they rolled;”	Captures the woman’s physical struggle and reveals her vulnerability.	Embodied Aging / Disability Studies
💔 “And then I knew that she was helplessly old,”	Emotional climax where the speaker realizes the true condition of the adult.	Epiphany in Narrative Theory
👶 “As I was helplessly young.”	Draws a powerful parallel between childhood and old age, both marked by helplessness.	Structuralism (Binary Opposition)
🔁 Entire shift from fantasy to reality	The narrative arc that moves from imaginative perception to mature awareness.	Reader-Response / Bildungsroman Lens

“Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall: Summary and Critique

“Psychoanalysis and Cultural Studies” by Stuart Hall first appeared in Cultural Studies, Volume 32, Issue 6, in 2018.

Introduction: “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall

“Psychoanalysis and Cultural Studies” by Stuart Hall first appeared in Cultural Studies, Volume 32, Issue 6, in 2018. Originally delivered as a talk at the ICA in London in 1987 and later edited by Lawrence Grossberg, the essay marks a significant moment in cultural theory where Hall traces the complex and transformative “interruption” of psychoanalysis into the domain of Cultural Studies. The article is pivotal in rethinking how questions of subjectivity, sexuality, and representation—previously overlooked by Cultural Studies—are radically reframed through psychoanalytic discourse, particularly following the Lacanian rereading of Freud and its interaction with feminism. Hall emphasizes that this engagement does not provide a seamless integration but rather an enduring tension, where the unconscious disrupts sociological and ideological analyses, challenging Cultural Studies to confront its historical neglect of the psychical dimensions of culture. Notably, Hall critiques both the limits of traditional Marxist paradigms and the dogmatic rigidity of certain Lacanian interpretations, insisting on the necessity of a dual awareness: one that speaks to both the psychic and the social without reducing one to the other. His essay remains a foundational intervention in literary and cultural theory, inviting scholars to grapple with the uneasy, yet productive, dialogue between inner psychic structures and outer sociopolitical realities.

Summary of “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall

🔍 Psychoanalysis as a decisive but incomplete interruption in Cultural Studies
Hall argues that psychoanalysis did not merge seamlessly into Cultural Studies, but rather interrupted it, transforming its theoretical foundations. This intervention, however, remains “incomplete,” leaving unresolved tensions.

“The displacements, theoretically and in terms of the forms of study… have been irrevocably transformed by the opening up of the spaces and questions which psychoanalysis poses to it” (Hall, 2018, p. 889).
The essay traces how this disruption reshaped Cultural Studies, especially through the challenges of subjectivity, representation, and the unconscious.

📚 Only post-Lacanian psychoanalysis had a transformative impact
Hall distinguishes between earlier forms of psychoanalysis and the radical shift brought by Lacan’s rereading of Freud. It was this version that made psychoanalysis relevant to cultural theory.

“The decisive impact in cultural theory has been made by that form of psychoanalysis which arises after the Lacanian rereading of Freud” (p. 890).
Lacan’s emphasis on language, the symbolic order, and the divided subject significantly reframed core concepts in Cultural Studies.

🌸 Feminism and psychoanalysis as a dual break
The conjunction of post-Lacanian psychoanalysis and feminism brought radical reconfigurations to how Cultural Studies understands identity and social life.

“It is the couplet post-Lacanian psychoanalysis and feminism which disrupts Cultural Studies, reposing questions about subjectivity, sexuality, the unconscious, representation, language…” (p. 891).
This double intervention forces Cultural Studies to confront dimensions it previously ignored—especially gender and the psychic.

🧠 The unconscious challenges sociological models of the self
Cultural Studies had long relied on models of the subject shaped by Marxist or anthropological thought. But the Freudian unconscious—especially as reformulated by Lacan—displaces those assumptions.

“There is always… something irretrievably lost, a fundamental displacement” in the process of identity formation (p. 891).
This irreducibility of the unconscious renders simplistic “inside/outside” models of self and culture untenable.

⚧️ Sexuality enters Cultural Studies via psychoanalysis
Hall critiques Cultural Studies for historically ignoring sexuality and sexual difference, treating cultural subjects as asexual.

“It walked and talked and looked at and attempted to analyse a culture… as if the subjects of culture were unsexed” (p. 891).
Psychoanalysis, especially in feminist contexts, brings sexuality and its unconscious dimensions to the center of cultural analysis.

👥 Subjectivity is not unified but fragmented and processual
Traditional Cultural Studies conceived of subjects as unified individuals or collective identities. Psychoanalysis breaks this illusion.

“Subjectivity as a constitution… which cannot be formed without fragmentation and displacement” (p. 893).
Rather than being a coherent entity, the subject is a site of division and contradiction—never whole or finished.

💬 Ideology as representation, not illusion
Marxist theories often described ideology as “false consciousness,” but psychoanalysis reframes ideology as a system of representations.

“The shift from the notion of an illusion to a system of representations… upon which the effectivity of ideology depends” (p. 893).
This emphasizes how subjects internalize ideology not just cognitively but affectively—through unconscious structures of recognition and misrecognition.

🧩 Language is central to subject formation and cultural life
Building on Lacan, Hall emphasizes that language is not just a medium of communication but the structure through which subjects and meanings are constituted.

“The unconscious is structured like a language… the subject is constituted in and through language” (p. 894).
Language thus becomes foundational to the analysis of culture, identity, and power in post-psychoanalytic Cultural Studies.

🚧 Critique of Lacanian dogmatism and metaphor becoming doctrine
Although Hall values Lacanian insights, he critiques the dogmatic tendencies within Lacanian theory—especially its transformation of metaphor into rigid principle.

“What began as a set of very important perceptions were transformed into a kind of dogmatic doxology” (p. 894).
This rigid formalism can limit the openness and usefulness of Lacanian thinking.

⚖️ Need to balance the psychic and the social
Hall warns that the rise of psychoanalysis led some scholars to neglect the social altogether, replacing social critique with subjectivity.

“They still require a theory of subjectivity, but they cannot be replaced by a theory of subjectivity” (p. 895).
Cultural theory must engage both domains—psychic and social—without collapsing one into the other.

🔥 The internalization of violence complicates political struggle
Psychoanalysis reveals that violence is not merely external or structural—it is internal, part of psychic life.

“Psychic life itself is aggressive and violent… the violence is already in our inside” (p. 896).
This insight complicates political action, challenging simplistic binaries of good/evil or oppressor/oppressed.

🧭 Towards a politics that recognizes radical subjectivity
Although psychoanalysis helps us understand our inner complicity in domination, it remains unclear how these insights can generate political change.

“What forms of politics and cultural struggle might come out of these new kinds of conceptions… remains an intractable puzzle” (p. 896).
Hall leaves us with a challenge: to rethink both theory and practice in light of the complex interrelations between psyche, power, and culture.

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall

🌟 Concept (with Symbol)	📚 Explanation	💬 Reference from Article
🔍 Post-Lacanian Psychoanalysis	A reinterpretation of Freud through Lacan that emphasizes language, the symbolic order, and the fragmented subject. It brought cultural theory into new territories.	“The decisive impact in cultural theory has been made by that form of psychoanalysis which arises after the Lacanian rereading of Freud” (p. 890).
🧠 The Unconscious	The realm of hidden mental activity that drives behavior, shaping subjectivity beyond conscious control. It disrupts sociological models of the self.	“The presence of the unconscious means that it is not possible… to accept a sociological… account” (p. 891).
👤 Subjectivity	Not a fixed identity but a fragmented and constantly shifting construct shaped by unconscious processes, language, and power.	“Subjectivity as a constitution… cannot be formed without fragmentation and displacement” (p. 893).
⚧️ Sexual Difference	A central concern of psychoanalysis and feminism. Previously ignored by Cultural Studies, it highlights how identity is constructed through gendered binaries and power.	“Cultural Studies had absolutely nothing to say about it… as if the subjects of culture were unsexed” (p. 891).
🖼️ Ideology as Representation	Moves beyond seeing ideology as illusion or “false consciousness,” framing it instead as structured systems of meaning, language, and subjectivity.	“Transform this conception of ideology… to a system of representations… on which the effectivity of ideology depends” (p. 893).
💭 Fantasy	Not just imagination, but structured desires and unconscious narratives (often sexualized) embedded in institutions and ideologies.	“At the centre of institutions are… fantasies of power… without which no proper account… can be given” (p. 892).
🔄 Displacement	A psychoanalytic process where meaning is never direct—always deferred or transformed. Reflects the loss or shift in identity and cultural expression.	“There is always… something irretrievably lost, a fundamental displacement” (p. 891).
🗣️ Language & the Symbolic Order	Language doesn’t merely reflect meaning—it produces subjects and social reality. Key to Lacan’s theory, it’s central to how culture and self are formed.	“The unconscious is structured like a language… constituted in and through language” (p. 894).
🧾 Representation	Goes beyond visuals—refers to systems of meaning-making central to ideology, identity, and cultural production.	“Obliges us to look at [ideology] as a system of representation” (p. 893).
📚 Cultural Studies	The interdisciplinary field concerned with analyzing culture, power, and identity. Hall critiques its early neglect of sexuality and unconscious processes.	“Cultural Studies had absolutely nothing to say about [sexuality]…” (p. 891).

Contribution of “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall to Literary Theory/Theories

🔍 Redefining the Subject as Fragmented, Not Unified
Hall challenges the humanist conception of a stable, coherent subject prevalent in earlier literary theory. He introduces the psychoanalytic idea of the subject as split, dislocated, and constructed through processes of language and fantasy.

“Subjectivity as a constitution… cannot be formed without fragmentation and displacement” (Hall, 2018, p. 893).
This rethinking aligns with poststructuralist literary theory and changes how characters, narrators, and authors are interpreted.

🧠 Emphasizing the Unconscious in Cultural and Literary Analysis
Hall insists that the unconscious is a vital domain for understanding culture, ideology, and identity—moving beyond surface meanings.

“The presence of the unconscious means that it is not possible… to accept a sociological… account of how the inside gets outside and the outside gets inside” (p. 891).
This enriches psychoanalytic literary criticism by reaffirming the power of hidden desires and repression in textual production and interpretation.

🖼️ Transforming Ideology from Illusion to Representation
One of Hall’s most important contributions is shifting the understanding of ideology in literary theory. Rather than a “false consciousness,” ideology is seen as a system of representation that actively shapes subjectivity and meaning.

“The shift from the notion of an illusion to a system of representations… on which the effectivity of ideology depends” (p. 893).
This deepens Marxist literary theory and intersects with post-Althusserian analysis.

🗣️ Foregrounding Language as Structuring, Not Reflective
Drawing from Lacan, Hall shows that language produces meaning and identity rather than merely expressing them.

“The unconscious is structured like a language… the subject is constituted in and through language” (p. 894).
This insight reinforces structuralist and poststructuralist approaches in literary theory, where language is not transparent but generative.

⚧️ Introducing Sexual Difference as Central to Cultural and Literary Theory
Hall critiques Cultural Studies—and by extension, literary criticism—for historically ignoring sexuality. He argues that psychoanalysis and feminism force literary theory to engage with sexual difference as a site of meaning and conflict.

“Cultural Studies had absolutely nothing to say about it… as if the subjects of culture were unsexed” (p. 891).
This aligns with feminist psychoanalytic readings, like those by Juliet Mitchell and Jacqueline Rose.

💭 Bringing Fantasy into the Analysis of Institutions and Texts
Hall incorporates fantasy—especially sexual and power fantasies—into the core of institutional and cultural analysis. This adds a new dimension to literary theory’s treatment of genre, narrative, and discourse.

“At the centre of institutions are… fantasies of power… without which no proper account… can be given” (p. 892).
In literary terms, this supports deeper readings of symbolic structures in fiction and drama.

📚 Expanding Cultural Studies to Include the Psychical
Hall expands the scope of Cultural Studies, traditionally focused on the social and historical, to include the psychical and libidinal.

“It is only when psychoanalysis… focuses radically on its own object… that it throws an important, piercing but uneven light” (p. 890).
This shift reorients literary theory toward questions of interiority, trauma, repression, and symbolic meaning.

🔄 Questioning Smooth Theoretical Synthesis
Hall resists the totalizing integration of psychoanalysis with literary and cultural theory. Instead, he advocates for holding the tension between the psychic and the social.

“They still require a theory of subjectivity, but they cannot be replaced by a theory of subjectivity” (p. 895).
This stance challenges literary theories that seek unified explanatory models, favoring hybridity and contradiction.

🔥 Challenging the Idea of Pure Political Resistance
By showing that violence and repression are internal as well as external, Hall complicates the idea of ethical purity in political or literary resistance.

“Psychic life itself is aggressive and violent… the violence is already in our inside” (p. 896).
This affects literary theory’s engagement with the political, suggesting that texts and subjects are never outside complicity.

🧩 Inspiring New Interdisciplinary Methods in Literary Criticism
Hall’s essay bridges psychoanalysis, feminism, Marxism, and semiotics—encouraging interdisciplinary approaches in literary studies.

“Some grasp of the social whole… does require an ability to speak both these languages together in some way” (p. 895).
This opens literary theory to richer, more pluralistic readings.

Examples of Critiques Through “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall

📚 Literary Work	🔍 Critical Focus through Hall’s Framework	🧠 Explanation Based on Hall’s Concepts
🧛 Dracula by Bram Stoker	Sexual repression, fantasy, and ideology of the imperial body	The vampire represents repressed sexuality and unconscious desire, while colonial fear and Victorian morality form an ideological system of representation (Hall, 2018, p. 893). The fantasy of control and purity masks cultural anxieties around the foreign “Other.”
🪞 The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath	Fragmented subjectivity and psychic violence under patriarchal institutions	Esther Greenwood’s mental breakdown illustrates Hall’s view of subjectivity as a constitution of fragmentation and displacement (p. 893). Cultural institutions (family, work, psychiatry) are embedded with fantasies of power and sexual difference (p. 892).
🕳️ Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison	Misrecognition, racial ideology, and representational systems	The protagonist’s invisibility reflects Hall’s notion that ideology functions through systems of misrecognition and unconscious positioning (p. 893). His journey critiques cultural structures that refuse to “see” Black subjectivity within symbolic orders of dominance.
🧵 Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys	Colonial displacement, female subjectivity, and cultural fantasy	Antoinette’s madness and erasure reveal the double break of psychoanalysis and feminism (p. 891). Her fragmented identity critiques how empire imposes ideological fantasies and sexual control on colonized women through language and cultural repression.

🧩 How This Reflects Hall’s Method:

Each critique uses Hall’s core insights:

Unconscious drives disrupt social narratives 🧠
Ideology is embedded in systems of representation 🖼️

Subjectivity is constructed, not given 👤
Fantasy underpins power and institutions 💭
Intersection with feminism and race reveals deeper displacements ⚧️🌍

Criticism Against “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall

🌀 Over-Complexity and Theoretical Density
Hall’s engagement with Lacanian psychoanalysis and its abstract language can alienate readers unfamiliar with psychoanalytic discourse.

“What began as a set of very important perceptions were transformed into a kind of dogmatic doxology” (Hall, 2018, p. 894).
📚 Critics argue this dense jargon may obstruct accessibility and interdisciplinary dialogue.

⚖️ Imbalance Between the Psychic and the Social
Although Hall insists on holding both domains in tension, some critics say the essay leans too far into subjectivity, potentially marginalizing material social structures.

“They still require a theory of subjectivity, but they cannot be replaced by a theory of subjectivity” (p. 895).
🌍 This concern reflects ongoing debates about how much psychoanalysis can explain systemic oppression, class struggle, or political change.

📉 Difficulty in Generating Political Praxis
Hall himself questions whether psychoanalysis can support political struggle, as it often emphasizes internal contradiction and complicity over clear agency.

“Whether it generates a politics or not, I don’t know… remains an intractable puzzle” (p. 896).
🚫 Critics may see this as undermining radical activism, favoring introspection over action.

🗣️ Ambiguity in Language and Terminological Slippage
Hall critiques Lacan for turning metaphors into literal claims (e.g., “the unconscious is a language”), yet he relies on similarly slippery formulations in parts of his own argument.

“The enormously suggestive metaphor… becomes… a really concrete established fact” (p. 894).
🔄 This opens his own essay to charges of imprecision.

🧠 Theoretical Elitism
The reliance on high theory—Lacan, Althusser, Freud—without extensive grounding examples or literary applications may seem elitist or detached from everyday cultural practices.
🎓 Critics from more practice-based traditions might see Hall’s psychoanalytic turn as moving away from grounded empirical Cultural Studies.

📌 Resistance from Within Cultural Studies
Traditional Cultural Studies emphasized materialism, empiricism, and class; integrating psychoanalysis disrupted this lineage, leading some to view it as a theoretical detour.

Hall acknowledges: “Cultural Studies had absolutely nothing to say about [sexuality]”—but some may argue that its original strengths were diluted in the psychoanalytic turn.

Representative Quotations from “Psychoanalysis And Cultural Studies ” by Stuart Hall with Explanation

💬 Quotation	📚 Explanation
🔀 “The displacements… have been irrevocably transformed by the opening up of the spaces and questions which psychoanalysis poses to it.” (p. 889)	Psychoanalysis did not smoothly integrate with Cultural Studies—it disrupted its foundations and introduced new questions about identity, power, and meaning.
⚧️ “It is the couplet post-Lacanian psychoanalysis and feminism which disrupts Cultural Studies.” (p. 891)	This key fusion opens critical pathways for rethinking subjectivity, sexuality, and representation within both literary and cultural theory.
🧠 “There is always… something irretrievably lost, a fundamental displacement.” (p. 891)	Reflects the psychoanalytic idea (especially Lacanian) that identity formation is structured around lack, loss, and non-closure.
❌ “Cultural Studies had absolutely nothing to say about it… as if the subjects of culture were unsexed.” (p. 891)	A strong critique of early Cultural Studies for ignoring gender and sexuality, which psychoanalysis and feminism later forcefully foregrounded.
👤 “Subjectivity as a constitution… cannot be formed without fragmentation and displacement.” (p. 893)	Hall challenges the humanist notion of a stable self; identity is a process marked by division and psychic contradiction.
💭 “At the centre of institutions are… fantasies of power… without which no proper account… can be given.” (p. 892)	Cultural and social institutions are shaped not only by structures but also by unconscious fantasies—especially around power and sexuality.
🖼️ “Transform this conception of ideology… to a system of representations… on which the effectivity of ideology depends.” (p. 893)	Moves from the Marxist idea of ideology as illusion to a more psychoanalytic view of ideology as embedded in symbolic representation.
🗣️ “The unconscious is structured like a language… constituted in and through language.” (p. 894)	Highlights Lacan’s core idea that identity and meaning are produced through symbolic systems, not pre-existing essence.
🚫 “What began as a set of very important perceptions were transformed into a kind of dogmatic doxology.” (p. 894)	Hall critiques how Lacanian theory, once radical, became rigid and closed, limiting the openness of cultural and theoretical inquiry.
🧩 “What forms of politics and cultural struggle might come out of these new kinds of conceptions… remains an intractable puzzle.” (p. 896)	While psychoanalysis reveals deep insights, Hall admits that its translation into clear political or activist strategies remains unresolved.

“Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash: Summary and Critique

“Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash first appeared in 2007 in the journal Theory, Culture & Society, Vol. 24(3), pp. 55–78.

Introduction: “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash

“Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash first appeared in 2007 in the journal Theory, Culture & Society, Vol. 24(3), pp. 55–78. Published by SAGE on behalf of the journal’s editorial board, the article marks a pivotal intervention in cultural theory by challenging the continued centrality of “hegemony” as the dominant framework for analyzing power in cultural studies. Lash contends that while the concept of hegemony—originating from Gramscian Marxism and influentially mobilized in the Birmingham School tradition—was vital in theorizing symbolic domination and ideology during the industrial and national period of modernity, it is increasingly inadequate for interpreting power in today’s global, post-industrial, and informational age. He argues that we now inhabit a post-hegemonic order where power has become ontological rather than epistemological, intensive rather than extensive, and communicational rather than representational. Drawing on a range of philosophical influences, including Foucault, Agamben, Deleuze, and Badiou, Lash charts a theoretical shift from “power-over” (potestas) to a generative “power-from-within” (potentia), emphasizing a move from normativity to facticity and from ideology to immanence. The article is significant in literary and cultural theory for proposing a new framework grounded in affect, media, and algorithmic control, and for repositioning cultural studies in relation to contemporary forms of biopolitical and networked power. Lash’s work reorients critical thought toward the ontological operations of power, making it a landmark text for scholars interested in post-Marxist theory, post-structuralism, and the politics of cultural production in the 21st century.

Summary of “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash

🔹 Key Arguments and Conceptual Shifts

Hegemony Is Epoch-Specific
Lash argues that hegemony was the defining concept for an earlier epoch of cultural studies but is no longer adequate to describe contemporary power.

“I want to suggest that power now, instead, is largely post-hegemonic.” (Lash, 2007, p. 55)

From Epistemology to Ontology
Power has shifted from being exercised through knowledge/discourse to being enacted through being and existence.

“Power in the post-hegemonic order is becoming ontological.” (p. 56)

From Power-Over to Power-From-Within
Classical hegemonic power was ‘power-over’; post-hegemonic power is immanent, generative, and arises from within systems and individuals.

“It is power that does not work through normalization… but through life and forms of life themselves.” (p. 61)

The Rise of Potentia over Potestas
Lash draws on Spinoza and Negri to distinguish between potestas (dominating power) and potentia (creative/life force power).

“This is what Antonio Negri… calls potentia, which has more to do with power as force, energy, potential.” (p. 59)

From Normativity to Facticity
Power is less about normative ideals and more about raw facts and immediacy.

“Post-hegemonic politics leaves such normativity and enters into the realm of the factual.” (p. 62)

🔹 Media, Communications, and Control

From Representation to Communication
Cultural power no longer operates through representational discourse but through instantaneous communication.

“The communication is ‘lighter’ than the symbolic. Hence it can travel faster and further.” (p. 65)

Legitimation by Performance
Legitimation is no longer discursively reasoned but achieved through technological or procedural performance.

“Legitimation… becomes automatic.” (p. 66)

Institutional Meltdown and Emergence of Empire
With the decline of traditional institutions, power consolidates in decentralized, communication-based control systems.

“Domination in the global communications order is… through not discipline but control.” (p. 67)

Communication as Control
Using cybernetics and media theory, Lash shows how power now flows through systems of control, not ideological discipline.

“Cybernetic power works through command, control, communications and intelligence.” (p. 67)

🔹 From Cultural Studies to Cultural Research

Second-Wave Cultural Studies
Post-hegemonic cultural studies focus on ontology, media, algorithm, and life, in contrast to the semiotic, discourse-based first-wave.

“Second-wave cultural studies also understands things as… empirical that is already transcendental.” (p. 73)

Collapse of Epistemology into Ontology
Deleuze, Lyotard, and others influence this new empiricism where media, code, and sensation become ontological.

“This logic… is immanent to sensation. In this ‘transcendental empiricism’, the transcendental is collapsed into the empirical.” (p. 73)

Culture Enters Industry; Industry Enters Culture
Cultural critique and industrial production (e.g., architecture, media, ICT) now converge.

“Cultural studies must engage with the culture industries: with art, the media, architecture…” (p. 74)

From Organic to Inorganic Intellectuals
The traditional class-based organic intellectual is replaced by coders, designers, and cultural technologists.

“Today’s ‘inorganic’, even crystalline intellectuals… work less as an organ… more as coders.” (p. 75)

🔹 Concluding Reflection

Ubiquity of Politics
Politics now permeates all aspects of life, not through institutions, but through embedded, coded systems.

“The post-hegemonic order is not just… ubiquitous computing and media. It also bequeaths to us ubiquitous politics.” (p. 75)

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash

🌐 Term/Concept	📘 Explanation	📝 Reference from Article
🔗 Hegemony	Power via consent and ideology; central to classical cultural studies, mediated through discourse and symbols.	“Hegemony means domination through consent as much as coercion.” (p. 55)
🚀 Post-Hegemony	A new form of power not based on consent or ideology, but on affect, force, and ontological immanence.	“Power now… is largely post-hegemonic.” (p. 55)
🔤 Symbolic Order	Linguistic and cultural codes that structure subjectivity and legitimize hegemonic domination.	“Hegemony… work[s] through ‘the symbolic order’…” (p. 56)
🧬 Ontological Power	Power as embedded in being itself, operating immanently rather than through external control.	“Power in the post-hegemonic order is becoming ontological.” (p. 56)
📚 Epistemological Power	Power based on knowledge, classification, and normative discourse — predicative in nature.	“Epistemological power works through logical statements or utterances…” (p. 56)
⚡ Potentia (Puissance)	A Spinozan vitalist power — generative, affirmative, and rooted in life itself.	“Potentia… has more to do with power as force, energy, potential.” (p. 59)
🛑 Potestas (Pouvoir)	Authoritative, institutionalized power — external, coercive, and regulatory.	“Potestas… works through external determination, like mechanism.” (p. 59)
🧱 Facticity	Emphasis on actual conditions over abstract norms; a turn toward empirical, lived reality.	“Post-hegemonic politics leaves such normativity and enters into the realm of the factual.” (p. 62)
📡 Communication	Replaces structured symbolic representation; decentralized, immediate, and performative in function.	“The communication… is the banalization of excess… it is immaterial.” (p. 65)
🔄 Extensive vs. Intensive Politics	Shift from norm-driven (extensive) politics to affective, immanent (intensive) forms of power.	“Extensive power… displaced by a politics of intensity.” (p. 55)
🧠 Collective Brain	Immanent organization and knowledge production within networks (e.g., “the multitude”).	“The multitudes give self-organization in politics… a collective brain.” (p. 60)
🧮 Algorithmic Power	Power exercised through hidden, generative digital rules embedded in software and protocols.	“Power through the algorithm is increasingly important…” (p. 70)
🌀 Transcendental Empiricism	Deleuzian framework where empirical data already embodies logic and ontology; knowledge is sensation-driven.	“The transcendental is collapsed into the empirical.” (p. 73)

Contribution of “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash to Literary Theory/Theories

🔁 Repositioning of Power from Hegemonic to Post-Hegemonic

Lash shifts the foundational paradigm from Gramscian hegemony (power as external, ideological, and discursive) to post-hegemonic power (internal, ontological, affective).
This challenges traditional literary criticism rooted in representational structures and ideological critique.

📖 “Power now… is largely post-hegemonic… power… is becoming ontological.” (p. 55–56)

🌀 Integration of Ontological Turn into Literary and Cultural Analysis

Lash aligns with post-structuralist and post-humanist literary theory by embracing ontology over epistemology.

Encourages a reading of texts not through symbolic meaning, but as ontological events or forces.
📖 “Post-hegemonic power… is less a question of cognitive judgments and more a question of being.” (p. 58)

🔤 Critique of the Symbolic Order and Semiotic Reading

Undermines traditional semiotics in literary theory (Saussure, Lacan, Barthes) by emphasizing the collapse of representation.
Reinforces postmodern literary theory’s skepticism toward fixed signs and stable meaning.
📖 “The symbolic… becomes an apparatus of domination… power penetrates your very being.” (p. 58)

💬 Shift from Representation to Communication

Emphasizes performativity and immediacy over structured representation—vital to understanding contemporary narrative, media, and literary forms.
Affects interpretation of literary texts in the digital age, where discourse is replaced by affective flow.

📖 “The symbolic… is collapsed into the order of communications… domination is through communication.” (p. 65–66)

💡 Value-ification of Fact and Post-Normative Ethics

Contributes to ethical literary criticism by introducing facticity as a space where ethics and aesthetics coexist without universal norms.

Encourages reading literature as engagement with the “factual” rather than idealized values.
📖 “Post-hegemonic politics… is a politics not of normativity but of such facticity.” (p. 64)

🧠 Introduction of Algorithmic and Generative Logic

Foregrounds the role of algorithmic logic and generative rules in shaping narrative forms—important for digital literature and computational poetics.
📖 “Power through the algorithm… is increasingly important… in digital rights management.” (p. 70)

🧬 Empirical–Transcendental Doubling of the Subject

Adapts Kantian and Durkheimian views of the subject into literary analysis by fusing empirical sensation with metaphysical depth.
Inspires renewed approaches to character, subjectivity, and consciousness in literature.
📖 “Man is an empirical–transcendental double… we are metaphysical–physical doubles.” (p. 72)

🎨 Media, Art, and Cultural Practice as Literary Sites

Redefines the boundaries of literary theory by integrating new media, design, architecture, and cultural research into the literary field.
📖 “Cultural studies must engage with the culture industries: art, media, architecture, ICT, software, protocol design.” (p. 74)

🧭 From Resistance to Dérive: New Strategies of Critique

Influences literary theory by promoting the dérive (drift) as a poetic, non-confrontational mode of critique—resonant with Situationist and avant-garde literature.
📖 “To dérive is to do none of the above. It is to slip out… a strategy through movement.” (p. 67)

🧩 Collapse of the Epistemological into the Ontological

Echoes Deleuzian transcendental empiricism: literary theory becomes a matter of sensation, intensity, and being—not interpretation or classification.
📖 “Epistemological and ontological collapse… the logic is immanent to sensation.” (p. 73)

Examples of Critiques Through “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash

📖 Literary Work	🔍 Critique via Lash’s Theory	🧠 Explanation
🐇 Don DeLillo’s White Noise	🌀 Communication over Representation	Reflects Lash’s thesis that power no longer works through symbolic institutions but via omnipresent media flows. The “white noise” of the novel illustrates how the symbolic is displaced by real-time data streams and commodified reality. (Lash, pp. 64–66)
🌀 J.G. Ballard’s Crash	🔥 Ontological Power & Affective Machinery	Embodies Lash’s shift from epistemological control to ontological domination: bodies, machines, and desire fuse in an immanent power structure. The eroticism of death and technology bypasses norms to activate pure affect. (Lash, pp. 57–59)
🧬 Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go	🧱 Facticity over Normativity	Power doesn’t operate through norms or ideology but through biological “facts.” The clones’ existence is dictated not by discourse but by their being—what Lash terms ontological facticity. (Lash, pp. 62–64)
🔮 Samuel Beckett’s The Unnamable	🌊 Dérive and Ontological Drift	The narrative disintegrates epistemological form and resists meaning. Lash’s notion of dérive—resistance through non-linear drifting—explains the narrator’s refusal to stabilize identity or knowledge. (Lash, pp. 67, 73–74)

Criticism Against “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash

🔄 Overgeneralization of the “Post-Hegemonic” Claim
Lash argues that we are entirely in a post-hegemonic age, downplaying the continuing relevance of ideology, discourse, and hegemonic structures in many global contexts.

“Hegemony…has had great truth-value for a particular epoch…that epoch is now beginning to draw to a close.” (p. 55)

📏 Abstract Terminology and Dense Style
His frequent use of terms like ontology, facticity, puissance, and immanence—often without concrete examples—can alienate readers and obscure meaning.

“Potentia…becomes a much more physical notion of energy… transversal of all types of material beings.” (p. 59)

🌐 Neglect of Global and Colonial Power Structures
While claiming a global shift to post-hegemonic systems, Lash underemphasizes how many societies still experience domination through traditional forms of state and ideological coercion—especially in postcolonial contexts.

His framework largely focuses on Western, technological, and urbanized settings like Tokyo, London, and global cities.

⚙️ Idealization of Technology and Media
By emphasizing the “vitalization” of things and digital flows, Lash risks celebrating the same socio-technical systems that reproduce inequality and surveillance capitalism.

“Neo-commodities…come alive and move, not mechanically… but flow in their logic.” (p. 69)

💢 Ambiguity Around Ethics and Political Agency
In rejecting normativity for “facticity,” the framework potentially weakens moral critique and leaves unclear where ethical interventions or justice-oriented struggles can be grounded.

“Post-hegemonic politics is a politics not of normativity but of such facticity.” (p. 64)

📉 Loss of Class Analysis
Lash admits that class is “much less addressed” in post-hegemonic cultural studies—yet economic inequality has intensified, making the downplaying of class arguably problematic.

“Post-hegemonic cultural studies has much less to do with social class… its analyses are much the poorer for this.” (p. 69)

🧪 Too Conceptual for Practical Application
The theoretical abstraction, while rich, is difficult to translate into actionable research methods or empirical studies—limiting its use in applied cultural studies or political organizing.

📚 Over-Reliance on Continental Philosophy
Though drawing richly from thinkers like Deleuze, Heidegger, and Badiou, critics argue that Lash’s synthesis leans too heavily on speculative metaphysics and less on grounded cultural critique.

Representative Quotations from “Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation?” by Scott Lash with Explanation

🔖 Quotation	💬 Explanation
📉 “I want to suggest that power now… is largely post-hegemonic.” (p. 55)	Lash introduces his thesis: we are moving beyond a world where power works through consent and ideology (hegemony), into a world shaped by direct, affective, and embedded forms of power.
🔄 “The hegemonic order works through a cultural logic of reproduction; the post-hegemonic power operates through a cultural logic of invention.” (p. 56)	Contrasts old hegemonic systems that reproduce order via discourse with new systems that produce reality through innovation and immediacy.
🌌 “Power in the post-hegemonic order is becoming ontological.” (p. 57)	Emphasizes a shift from epistemological control (through knowledge and representation) to ontological power—affecting the very being of subjects.
⚡ “Post-hegemonic power works… less like mechanism than like ‘life.’” (p. 59)	Describes the new form of power as dynamic, vital, and organic—aligned with Spinoza’s potentia and Deleuzian concepts of force and energy.
🧬 “Power has become more sinister in a post-hegemonic age. In the age of hegemony, power only appropriated your predicates… it penetrates your very being.” (p. 59)	Argues that modern power no longer shapes just our actions or roles—it invades the self, becoming internal and bio-political.
🌐 “Communication is at the heart of the post-hegemonic order.” (p. 65)	In place of deep symbolic representation (like myth or discourse), modern power works via communications—fast, light, decontextualized exchanges.
🌀 “Legitimation is no longer separate from what it is meant to legitimate, it becomes automatic.” (p. 66)	Critiques how performance and function substitute democratic discourse—there’s no outside authority, just self-justifying systems.
🧱 “In the post-hegemonic order, power comes to act from below: it no longer stays outside that which it ‘effects.’” (p. 60)	Marks the immanence of contemporary power—it now operates from within systems, institutions, and subjects, not above them.
🧭 “The post-hegemonic order is not just an era of ubiquitous computing and ubiquitous media. It also bequeaths to us ubiquitous politics.” (p. 74)	Suggests that in a digital and networked world, political dynamics are everywhere—across culture, media, and technology.
🧠 “If power has become ontological, intensive, factical and communicational… cultural studies must engage with such practice.” (p. 74)	Concludes with a call to action: cultural studies must adapt to this new regime of power and integrate with art, design, media, and technology.

“Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey: Summary and Critique

“Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey first appeared in 1992 in the Journal of Communication (Vol. 42, No. 2, Spring).

Introduction: “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey

“Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey first appeared in 1992 in the Journal of Communication (Vol. 42, No. 2, Spring). In this seminal piece, Carey engages deeply with the ideological clashes surrounding cultural studies and the backlash against “political correctness” in academia, situating the debate within a broader critique of higher education’s structural and cultural decline. He draws a sharp distinction between two broad currents in cultural studies—one rooted in continental theory (Derrida, Foucault, Althusser) and another in American pragmatism (Dewey, James, Rorty)—aligning himself with the latter. Carey argues that cultural studies, while critical and anti-foundational, has become vulnerable due to theoretical fragmentation, its neglect of economic critique, and its increasingly narrow focus on race and gender as primary ideological axes. He critiques both the Left and the Right, asserting that the Left has failed to produce a unifying, pragmatic ideology while the Right has succeeded in mobilizing resentment against universities through the discourse of political correctness. Central to the article is Carey’s concern that cultural studies has abandoned the ideal of a shared public culture, leaving the field politically impotent and intellectually isolated. This essay remains significant in literary theory and cultural criticism as it articulates the internal contradictions of academic leftism and warns against the instrumentalization of education for ideological purposes. It is widely referenced for its sober reflection on the institutional and ideological responsibilities of scholars engaged in cultural analysis.

Summary of “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey

🧭 1. Two Camps in Cultural Studies: American Pragmatism vs. Continental Theory

Carey draws a foundational line between two philosophical sources within cultural studies: one rooted in American pragmatism (Dewey, James, Rorty) and the other in European poststructuralism (Derrida, Foucault, Althusser).

“Cultural studies… can be simplistically divided… into two broad camps: one that draws primarily upon continental sources… and one that draws primarily upon American sources” (Carey, 1992, p. 56).

🎯 2. Reclaiming Cultural Studies as a Democratic, Reformist Endeavor

Carey situates himself in the American tradition, advocating for cultural studies that supports liberal democracy, civic engagement, and communal responsibility.

“I have not as yet given up faith in liberal democracy… for an open, nonascriptive basis of community life” (p. 56).

⚔️ 3. Cultural Studies under Conservative Attack

Cultural studies has become a scapegoat in conservative critiques of academia, particularly in the discourse of “political correctness.”

“Roger Kimball… has identified cultural studies as part of the problem… rather than… part of the solution” (p. 56).
“The conservative critique… has identified cultural studies as part of the ‘problem of higher education’” (p. 58).

🧩 4. Internal Weaknesses of the Cultural Left

Carey criticizes the Left for lacking a cohesive ideology, becoming overly focused on critique rather than presenting constructive alternatives.

“The Left has a dozen different critiques of ideology; it just does not have an ideology” (p. 67).
“The cultural Left… cannot speak to the general public… because it is jargon besotted… and contemptuous of ordinary people” (p. 67).

🛠️ 5. The Crisis of Higher Education: Not Political Correctness, But Educational Failure

The real crisis in universities is not ideology but a decline in educational quality and purpose.

“The decadence besetting the academy is not political correctness but a genuine disinterest in education” (p. 58).
“Students approach us… as consumers… ingesting whatever is fashionable and forgettable this semester” (p. 58).

🧱 6. The Illusion of a Common Culture

Carey challenges both conservative nostalgia for a unified “Western tradition” and radical deconstruction of culture into fragments of race/gender, calling for a richer conception of American cultural experience.

“Cultural studies was not an argument against a common culture but against the simple-minded notion that… American culture was a direct… tributary of… the Greeks and the Bible” (p. 59).

⚖️ 7. The Over-Reduction of Culture to Race and Gender

Carey critiques the theoretical collapse in cultural studies where economic and structural analysis has been abandoned in favor of identity politics.

“Culture is now reduced to ideology and ideology in turn reduced to race and gender” (p. 60).
“The Left… forgot to develop a political program… that can speak to… citizens” (p. 67).

📉 8. Professionalization and Instrumentalization of Education

He argues that both liberal arts and professional programs have become overly utilitarian, losing sight of education as a civic and moral good.

“The liberal arts have… become professionalized… [and] the curriculum increasingly reflects… the professional interests… of faculty” (p. 69).
“Unless we can agree that education has purposes that are intrinsic to it… the university will be exploited… by extrinsic purposes” (p. 71).

🧠 9. The Debate as Theatrical, Not Transformational

The political correctness debate, Carey insists, is more performative than substantive, failing to address the actual problems of the university.

“This is a debate that confuses garnering publicity and producing celebrity with making political gains” (p. 63).
“The university described in the literature of political correctness is a fantasy” (p. 63).

🚨 10. Who Loses? The Students

Ultimately, the victims of these ideological failures are students—especially disadvantaged ones—who are promised transformative education but receive diluted curricula.

“The big losers in this great debate are the students and through them the country at large” (p. 72).
“It is the newcomers to higher education who are the big losers” (p. 72).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey

🔑 Theoretical Term	📝 Explanation	📖 Article Reference
📚 Cultural Studies	An interdisciplinary field that views culture as an active process of meaning-making and a site of struggle, rejecting formalism and positivism.	“Cultural studies arose as a revolt against formalism and was anti-positivist and anti-foundational… a process… of the making of meaning” (p. 58)
🧱 Hegemony	Derived from Gramsci, it refers to ideological dominance achieved by appealing to shared human desires—not just class interests.	“Ideologies achieve hegemony… by speaking to relatively enduring… human needs and desires” (p. 60)
⚖️ Ideology	A structured set of ideas shaping culture and social life; Carey critiques its reduction to race and gender in much of contemporary cultural studies.	“Ideology has swallowed culture, and race and gender have swallowed ideology” (p. 60)
🔁 Base and Superstructure	A classical Marxist concept where the economic base shapes the cultural superstructure; Carey notes how cultural studies sought to revise this relation.	“Cultural studies began as an attempt to undo the relation of base and superstructure in classical Marxist theory” (p. 60)
🌍 American Pragmatism	A tradition rooted in thinkers like Dewey and Rorty, focusing on democracy, reform, and practical engagement with social problems.	“I take myself to be part of the Dewey group… because… I have not… given up faith in liberal democracy” (p. 56)
🧩 Identity Politics	A political approach that emphasizes race, gender, and sexual identity; Carey critiques it as overly narrow and disconnected from broader civic concerns.	“Race and gender have assumed a position as the new ‘base’” (p. 60)
🎭 Political Correctness	A conservative label used to attack progressive academic movements; Carey calls it a “condensation symbol” reflecting real public resentment.	“‘Political correctness’ is an effective political attack because it acts as a condensation symbol” (p. 58)
🏛️ Common Culture	The idea of a shared cultural foundation; Carey supports a nuanced, inclusive view against both nostalgic conservatism and radical fragmentation.	“Cultural studies… was not an argument against a common culture but against… a simple-minded notion…” (p. 59)
🧠 Imagined Community	From Benedict Anderson, this concept explains nations as socially constructed; Carey applies it to critique mythologized versions of American identity in the PC debate.	“Every nation is an ‘imagined community’ in the sense Benedict Anderson has given to that phrase” (p. 60)

Contribution of “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey to Literary Theory/Theories

🧠 1. Cultural Studies & Literary Theory

Carey affirms and critiques the foundational assumptions of cultural studies as a form of literary and critical theory, helping expand its scope beyond textual analysis to institutional critique.

“Cultural studies arose as a revolt against formalism and was anti-positivist and anti-foundational: a form of both interpretive and critical theory” (p. 58).
✅ Contribution: Carey reasserts cultural studies as a method for interrogating power, ideology, and meaning in both texts and institutions.

🧭 2. Pragmatism vs. Poststructuralism

He introduces a distinctly American pragmatist approach to cultural and literary theory, contrasting it with the European poststructuralist tradition.

“I take myself to be part of the Dewey group… because… I have not as yet given up faith in liberal democracy” (p. 56).
✅ Contribution: Carey repositions literary theory within a pragmatic, reformist framework rooted in experience and democratic ideals.

🧱 3. Hegemony & Ideology Critique (Gramscian Theory)

Carey evaluates how cultural studies has handled Gramsci’s notion of hegemony, stressing the need for it to address broad civic and moral concerns beyond identity categories.

“Hegemonic analysis must move beyond ideology to culture and recognize that human interests cannot be exhausted by any social category” (p. 61).
✅ Contribution: Expands literary theory’s engagement with hegemony toward inclusive civic imagination, not just ideological critique.

🧩 4. Identity Politics and Literary Criticism

He critiques the reduction of cultural analysis to identity categories, warning that literary theory risks losing its broader cultural relevance.

“Race and gender have assumed a position as the new ‘base’… Ideology has swallowed culture” (p. 60).
✅ Contribution: Warns literary theory against becoming narrowly essentialist, encouraging a return to contextually rich, socially responsive analysis.

🔍 5. Anti-Canon & Curriculum Reform

Engaging the political correctness debate, Carey implicitly critiques the binary of canon vs. anti-canon in literary studies, calling for deeper reflection on curricular politics.

“Curriculum reform… has virtually nothing to do with what is going on in most college classrooms” (p. 63).
✅ Contribution: Reorients literary curricular debates toward substantive educational and institutional realities rather than symbolic gestures.

🏛️ 6. Reimagining the “Common Culture”

Carey challenges both conservative and radical accounts of cultural heritage, advocating a historically grounded but evolving notion of shared culture.

“Cultural studies… was not an argument against a common culture but against… a simple-minded notion” (p. 59).
✅ Contribution: Offers literary theory a model for balancing tradition and pluralism without retreating to essentialism or relativism.

📉 7. Institutional Critique of the Academy

He bridges literary theory with critical university studies, exposing the commodification of education and its impact on cultural and literary discourse.

“The university has pretty much disappeared as an independent and unitary institution” (p. 68).
✅ Contribution: Elevates the role of institutional critique within literary theory, encouraging scholars to reflect on their positionality.

🗣️ 8. Language, Tropes, and Political Rhetoric

Carey critiques the way ideological discourse (including literary theory) becomes disconnected from real-world communication, saturated with jargon.

“We seem to be surprised that [ideology] speaks in tropes and hyperbole rather than flattened academic discourse” (p. 58).
✅ Contribution: Calls for clearer, more engaged forms of literary criticism that resonate beyond academic circles.

Examples of Critiques Through “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey

📖 Literary Work	🧠 Critique via Carey’s Framework	🧰 Concepts Applied from Carey
🏞️ The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (Mark Twain)	Challenges to the racial and moral complexities of the novel can be deepened by avoiding over-politicization through identity categories alone.	Identity Politics, Common Culture, American Experience: “Race and gender have assumed a position as the new ‘base’” (p. 60)
🗽 The Great Gatsby (F. Scott Fitzgerald)	The novel’s focus on class illusion and economic ambition aligns with Carey’s critique of academia’s neglect of economic structures.	Base and Superstructure, Ideology, Economic Critique: “The economy has been obliterated from theoretical view” (p. 60)
👒 The Awakening (Kate Chopin)	While feminist readings are essential, Carey would caution against reducing the novel purely to gender politics, advocating broader civic insight.	Hegemony, Pragmatism, Civic Culture: “Hegemonic politics works… by effacing those differences to constitute civil society” (p. 61)
🔥 Beloved (Toni Morrison)	A powerful work of historical and cultural memory, Carey’s approach encourages analyzing its role in shaping national consciousness, not just identity.	Imagined Community, Common Culture, Cultural Production: “The America imagined… is disconnected from experience” (p. 60)

Criticism Against “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey

⚖️ 1. Oversimplification of Identity Politics

Critics argue that Carey downplays the importance of race, gender, and sexuality by portraying them as narrow or reductive concerns within cultural studies.

🧩 He critiques identity as a “new base” replacing economic analysis, but this risks erasing the lived realities of systemic oppression.

🧵 2. Nostalgia for Civic Unity

His call for a shared “common culture” is seen by some as nostalgic or idealistic, failing to reckon with the structural inequalities that fragment cultural unity in the first place.

🏛️ The idea of “neighbors lending lawnmowers” may sound inclusive, but it presumes a level of privilege and stability not afforded to all communities.

📉 3. Lack of Engagement with Contemporary Theory

Carey’s critique of poststructuralism and theory-heavy approaches may dismiss valuable insights from deconstruction, feminism, queer theory, and postcolonialism.

📚 His framing of theorists like Derrida or Foucault as distant from public life overlooks how these theories have informed real-world activism and critique.

🔒 4. Overemphasis on Institutional Decline

Some scholars argue Carey blames universities too heavily for cultural decline without acknowledging broader neoliberal economic forces.

🏫 His claim that the university has “become a balance sheet” (p. 68) is valid but not unique to the academy—it reflects wider capitalist transformations.

🧠 5. Dismissal of Theoretical Rigor

Carey’s pragmatist disdain for jargon can be read as anti-intellectual or populist, limiting the capacity of scholarship to push conceptual boundaries.

💬 Calling theory “flattened academic discourse” may resonate rhetorically, but it risks alienating rigorous critical traditions.

📚 6. False Dichotomy Between Theory and Practice

He sometimes draws a sharp line between academic theory and real-world problems, but many scholars see this as a false divide.

🔄 The best of cultural studies—Stuart Hall, bell hooks, Judith Butler—has always linked theory to lived experience and activism.

🧩 7. Underestimation of Right-Wing Culture Wars

While Carey critiques both Left and Right, some argue he underplays the strategic, well-funded nature of conservative attacks on the humanities.

🎯 His suggestion that the Left “deserves to lose” risks validating coordinated disinformation campaigns against academic freedom.

🧭 8. Idealization of American Pragmatism

His celebration of Dewey and Rorty may seem too rooted in American exceptionalism, potentially ignoring global intellectual developments.

🌍 Cultural studies is international and transdisciplinary—Carey’s American framing may limit its scope and relevance globally.

Representative Quotations from “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” by James W. Carey with Explanation

Quotation	📝 Explanation
🧠 “Cultural studies arose as a revolt against formalism and was anti-positivist and anti-foundational.”	Carey frames cultural studies as a critical departure from rigid academic structures, emphasizing interpretive over empirical methods.
📚 “Culture… is a process… of the making of meaning, a process… of ‘wording the world together.’”	Culture, for Carey, is not fixed or external, but continuously shaped through human discourse and symbolic exchange.
⚖️ “Ideology has swallowed culture, and race and gender have swallowed ideology.”	He critiques how cultural studies has become dominated by identity politics, reducing nuanced analysis to essential categories.
🏛️ “Cultural studies… was not an argument against a common culture but against… a simple-minded notion.”	Carey defends the idea of shared cultural meaning, while rejecting conservative or narrow definitions of heritage.
🔍 “Political correctness is an effective political attack because it acts as a condensation symbol.”	He argues that “political correctness” is less a real threat than a symbolic shorthand for broader anxieties about academia.
🗳️ “The Left has a dozen different critiques of ideology; it just does not have an ideology.”	A critique of the academic Left’s lack of unified political strategy or vision, despite strong theoretical tools.
📉 “The university has pretty much disappeared as an independent and unitary institution.”	Carey laments the erosion of academic independence, suggesting universities now serve external powers.
🛠️ “Higher education… is now solely the instrument of the powerful.”	This reflects his fear that universities have lost intrinsic value and serve political and economic elites.
🌍 “The America imagined in the political correctness debate is disconnected from the experience of the majority.”	Both Left and Right are critiqued for promoting abstract visions of American identity that ignore real social diversity.
🧵 “To continue the debate is to run the risk we shall bore one another to death.”	Carey expresses fatigue with the repetitive nature of the PC debate, calling for more productive intellectual engagement.

“Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith: Summary and Critique

“Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” by Simon Frith first appeared in 1992 in the journal Critical Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1.

Introduction: “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith

“Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” by Simon Frith first appeared in 1992 in the journal Critical Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1. In this landmark essay, Frith offers a sociologically grounded critique of the state of English studies, arguing that the discipline’s identity has been fundamentally reshaped by the rise of cultural studies. He explores how English departments have moved from a narrow focus on canonical literature to embrace a broader, interdisciplinary approach that includes media, popular culture, and theory—changes he attributes to both internal academic critiques and external socio-political pressures such as neoliberal education policies and shifting definitions of culture. Frith’s central question—“whose literature? whose culture?”—challenges the elitist and exclusionary tendencies of traditional literary studies, foregrounding issues of class, race, and gender in the constitution of literary value. Drawing from thinkers like Raymond Williams and Peter Brooker, he outlines how cultural studies dismantled the “three autonomies” of literary scholarship: the independence of the text, the discipline, and the individual reader. Importantly, Frith doesn’t see this as a crisis, but as a necessary pluralization of method and content, albeit one that risks losing sight of aesthetic evaluation. His work remains significant in literary theory for its lucid examination of literature’s institutional evolution and for advocating a model of education that bridges analytic rigor with cultural relevance.

Summary of “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith

🔑 Main Ideas with Supporting Quotations

English Studies Are in a State of Flux, Not Crisis
- Frith notes the paradox of English studies: it’s institutionally strong but intellectually unsettled:

“There isn’t a crisis in any straightforward sense… Nonetheless, in the last twenty years literature departments have been unsettled by uncertainties” (Frith, 1991, p. 2).

Cultural Studies Has Redefined English Departments
- English studies have expanded to include media, gender, race, and popular culture:

“What is now offered in many ‘English’ departments… would be better described as discourse analysis, or text analysis, or cultural studies” (Frith, 1991, p. 4).

Origins of Cultural Studies Are Class-Based and Political
- Early cultural studies responded to elite literary traditions by incorporating working-class culture and media:

“Literature described a narrow band of experience for a narrow social group” (Frith, 1991, p. 5).

The Rise of Theory Brought Politics into English Studies
- Feminist and poststructuralist critiques challenged the literary canon and demanded ideological analysis:

“The effect (a ’68 effect) was to politicise English studies” (Frith, 1991, p. 6).

Cultural Studies Appealed to Market Pressures and Institutional Needs
- English departments adopted cultural studies partly to justify their relevance:

“English departments had to restate their purpose… persuade academic colleagues of their importance” (Frith, 1991, p. 6).

Expansion of the Canon Doesn’t Always Mean Transformation
- Frith critiques how even radical changes in curriculum risk becoming institutionalized:

“Literary theory… absorbed into English departments not as a form of woodworm… but as a new scholasticism” (Frith, 1991, p. 8).

Definitions of Culture Are Shifting Nationally
- Governmental and arts institutions increasingly treat pop culture as legitimate culture:

“The British Council’s sudden interest in ‘cultural studies’… clearly meaning an attention to ‘low’ as well as to high culture” (Frith, 1991, p. 9).

Debates on National Identity and Canon Are Politically Charged
- Conservatives fear cultural studies undermine national cohesion and traditional values:

“The transmission of the culture that unites… is faltering” (Will as cited in Frith, 1991, p. 11).

The Notion of Literary Transcendence Is Historically and Socially Constructed
- What is called “great literature” often excludes minority voices and serves elite identities:

“‘National identity’ is a class, gender and racial identity” (Frith, 1991, p. 13).

Cultural Studies Challenges Academic Elitism But Risks Losing Aesthetic Judgment
- Frith warns that critical rigor may be replaced with political checklists:

“Nowhere… is there room to ask whether a book… is any good or what the answer might mean” (Frith, 1991, p. 17).

Popular Culture and Literature Are Interwoven in Contemporary Narratives
- Examples from fiction show how pop music and mass media shape sensibility:

“For both writers… the point is precisely to follow the ways in which sensibilities are shaped by pop culture” (Frith, 1991, p. 24).

The Role of Experience and Identity in Reading Is Complex
- Frith challenges the simplification of reading as vicarious empathy or mere representation:

“Is literary experience the equivalent of any other sort of experience?” (Frith, 1991, p. 23).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith

🌈 Theoretical Term (with Symbol)	✅ Explanation	📝 Usage in Frith’s Article
🎭 Cultural Studies	An interdisciplinary field analyzing everyday life, media, and identity as sites of cultural struggle and meaning.	Frith argues that cultural studies has “appropriated English,” shifting the focus beyond traditional literature (p. 4).
📚 Canon	The traditionally accepted set of literary works deemed culturally or artistically significant.	Challenged by feminist and political scholars for being exclusionary; Frith notes its expansion and critique (p. 6).
🧪 Theory	Abstract frameworks like feminism, Marxism, psychoanalysis used to interpret culture and texts.	Described as “new scholasticism” absorbed into English departments, sometimes routinely applied (p. 8).
🗳️ Ideology	A set of beliefs or values shaping cultural and political structures, often unconsciously.	Literary texts are interpreted as either reproducing or resisting dominant ideologies (p. 18).
🏷️ Representation	How people, cultures, and ideas are portrayed or constructed in texts.	Applied to how literature reflects gender, race, or identity (e.g., women’s or Black writing) (p. 23).
🔄 Multidisciplinarity	The blending of multiple disciplines (e.g., literature, sociology, philosophy) in academic study.	English has historically drawn on many disciplines—“methodological pluralism” is central (p. 15).
🏛️ National Identity	Shared cultural norms and values associated with a nation, often linked to language and literature.	Tied to English curriculum debates and conservative efforts to preserve “Englishness” through literature (p. 11).
📈 Market Forces / Neoliberalism	Economic pressures in education and culture that prioritize utility, profit, and competition.	Frith connects cultural studies’ rise to the need for departments to appear marketable and fundable (p. 6).
📺 Mass Culture / Popular Culture	Culture produced for and consumed by the masses, such as pop music, TV, advertising.	Frith explores how media culture reshapes sensibilities and literary practice (e.g., MTV, pop novels) (p. 22).
🧩 Structure of Feeling	Raymond Williams’ concept: shared emotional experiences not easily articulated through ideology or structure.	Used to emphasize the emotional/aesthetic aspects of culture studied through literature (p. 19).
🕳️ Deconstruction	A critical approach that questions fixed meanings, binaries, and textual authority.	Viewed with suspicion by conservatives; linked to critique of canon and truth in literature teaching (p. 11).
👓 Critical Pedagogy	Educational practices aimed at developing students’ critical thinking about culture, power, and identity.	Literature is used to make students “culturally self-aware” and analytically competent (p. 17).
💬 Discourse Analysis	The study of language and meaning in social contexts across various media.	Describes the shift in English departments from literary interpretation to analyzing all forms of texts (p. 4).

Contribution of “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith to Literary Theory/Theories

🎭 Cultural Studies

📌 Frith positions cultural studies as a transformative force within literary studies, expanding English beyond the traditional literary canon to include media, popular culture, and everyday texts.

“What is now offered in many ‘English’ departments… would be better described as discourse analysis, or text analysis, or cultural studies” (p. 4).

📌 Emphasizes the democratization of literature, arguing that cultural studies allows inclusion of marginalized voices (women, working-class, racial minorities).

“Adding ‘suppressed’ women’s texts or Afro-American writing to reading lists means that history reenters the domain of literary study” (p. 7).

🗳️ Marxist Theory / Ideology Critique

🧭 Frith discusses how literature reflects and resists dominant ideologies, reshaping literature as a space of ideological struggle rather than pure aesthetic value.

“To treat literary studies as cultural studies is to treat literature as ideology… the question for students becomes how a fiction works to reproduce (or resist) dominant values” (p. 18).

📉 Critiques the market-driven shift in education, noting how neoliberal forces push literary studies to justify itself through “transferable skills.”

“The impact of cultural studies… can also only be understood as a consequence of the impact of free market ideology on the education system” (p. 6).

♀️ Feminist Literary Criticism

💡 Frith acknowledges feminist challenges to canonical authority, helping validate literary studies that include gendered experience and critique.

“A political dissatisfaction… hence, for example, the feminist critique of taken-for-granted tables of literary merit” (p. 5).

📚 Supports inclusion of women’s texts as ‘representative’ writing, recognizing literature as a vehicle for identity and resistance.

“Experience re-emerges… in the concept of ‘representative’ writing – women’s writing representing the female experience…” (p. 23).

🕳️ Poststructuralism / Deconstruction

❓ Questions the possibility of fixed meaning and authority in literary criticism, aligning with poststructuralist concerns.

“Theory already seems to have been absorbed… not as a form of woodworm… but as a new scholasticism” (p. 8).

📎 Frith notes the conservative backlash to deconstruction, portraying it as a destabilizing force that undermines national and cultural unity.

“So-called literary theory mocks the very idea of ‘truth’… students are now compelled to read ‘politically correct’ feminist and black and gay ‘literature’” (p. 11).

🌐 Postcolonial Theory

🌍 Touches on how literary curriculum can reinforce or challenge national identity, a core concern in postcolonial theory.

“The issue that faces literature departments is not the place of ‘theory’ as such, but how to respond to a general cultural tendency towards populism and relativism” (p. 10).

✈️ Acknowledges multiculturalism and globalization in education, even quoting curriculum concerns over including “works from different cultures” (p. 12).

💬 Reader-Response Theory

📖 Critiques the suppression of reader experience in favor of rigid theoretical applications, calling for attention to literary engagement.

“Teachers are apt to be dismissive of the ‘personal response’… but cultural studies teachers want to map texts onto people” (p. 23).

🎨 Aesthetic Theory

🎭 Warns that aesthetic value is being replaced by political readings, cautioning against losing sight of literature’s formal and emotional dimensions.

“Discrimination is taught as a political rather than as an aesthetic act” (p. 17).

📌 Calls to revive attention to beauty, ambiguity, and form, aligning with critics like Northrop Frye.

“Culture also describes an aesthetic sensibility… we need to draw from literature as Raymond Williams suggested in his concept of ‘a structure of feeling’” (p. 19).

Examples of Critiques Through “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith

📚 Literary Work	🔍 Critical Perspective (via Frith)	💬 Relevant Quotation / Concept
Jane Austen’s Novels	Austen is reevaluated as a sexual and political figure, particularly in feminist and cultural studies contexts.	“Today’s bluff commentators… hoot at the treatment of Jane Austen as a sexual figure…” (p. 11)
The Tempest by William Shakespeare	Explored through imperialist and ideological critique; viewed as a text that can be re-read through power structures and colonial legacy.	“Commentators scoff at the idea of The Tempest as an imperialist text…” (p. 11)
The Buddha of Suburbia by Hanif Kureishi	Seen as a fusion of literature and pop culture, showing how media and subculture shape literary form and identity.	“Whether (and how) literature can occupy the same territory as pop music…” (p. 23)
The Golden Notebook by Doris Lessing	Lessing’s novel is used to illustrate the complexity of form and disruption of reader expectations, resisting simple consumption or narrative closure.	“A book is only… potent… when its plan and shape and intention are not understood…” (p. 21)

Criticism Against “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith

🌐Main Point	❗ Criticism
🌀 Conceptual Ambiguity	Frith blurs the lines between literary studies and cultural studies without fully resolving the tensions or boundaries between them. His essay raises more questions than it definitively answers.
🧱 Overextension of Cultural Studies	Cultural studies is treated almost as a panacea, absorbing all of English studies, but this risks diluting disciplinary rigor, especially around textual aesthetics and formalism.
🎯 Vagueness in Pedagogical Application	While he outlines an ideal school day and diverse syllabi, he fails to offer clear pedagogical strategies for integrating these ideas into structured academic curricula.
⚖️ Political Overload	His framing sometimes makes all literary judgment seem political, potentially undermining aesthetic value and students’ personal interpretations.
📚 Insufficient Literary Close Reading	Frith draws from a wide range of cultural and sociological sources, but rarely engages in direct close reading of specific literary texts, which weakens his case in traditional literary circles.
🏛️ Anti-Canonical Bias	Though aiming for inclusivity, his dismissal of the canon at times seems ideologically motivated, raising the concern of replacing one orthodoxy with another.
🤹 Theory Saturation	The heavy reliance on overlapping theoretical models (feminism, Marxism, poststructuralism, media theory) can overwhelm clarity, making the essay feel conceptually cluttered.
🪞 Paradox of Reflexivity	Frith critiques traditional disciplines for lacking reflexivity, but his own assumptions and positions aren’t always self-examined, especially regarding what qualifies as ‘good’ cultural study.

Representative Quotations from “Literary Studies As Cultural Studies – Whose Literature? Whose Culture?” By Simon Frith with Explanation

🗣️ Quotation	🧠 Explanation
“📚 To study literature has always been to study culture.”	Frith emphasizes that literature and culture are inherently linked, opposing the notion of a purely aesthetic or text-centric approach.
“🎭 Literary judgment… becomes a matter of political assessment.”	Reading literature is never neutral—it involves decoding cultural and political ideologies embedded within texts.
“🏫 English departments seemed to move to the left as the political climate shifted to the right.”	Frith reflects on how English studies became a space for progressive theory as a reaction to conservative political trends.
“🔄 What was now at issue was the relationship between culture and ideology.”	This reveals how cultural texts serve as vehicles for ideological production and critique—central to cultural studies.
“🧱 The challenge to the old, ‘limited’ canon may… simply produce a new ‘extended’ canon.”	Frith warns that canon revision can risk tokenism if it lacks deep structural change in pedagogical methods.
“🧩 The problem is not what is meant by literature but what is meant by culture.”	Frith turns the focus away from text towards the shifting, expansive concept of “culture” in literary studies.
“💬 Experience re-emerges, in however mediated a form, in the concept of ‘representative’ writing.”	Cultural representation and identity politics shape how readers and students relate to literature.
“🌍 Cultural studies should be an exploration of how the ‘commercial’ and the ‘literary’ between them articulate the ‘popular’.”	Rather than binary oppositions, Frith urges an integrative analysis of literature, media, and mass culture.
“🎢 To move from an exclusive to an inclusive textual theory is to change the terms of the question of value.”	Inclusion in reading lists redefines what is deemed valuable, challenging elitist norms.
“🧭 We have to tread our own fine line between cultural celebration and dismissal.”	Frith advocates for critical discernment when engaging with both popular and academic culture, avoiding extremes.

“History as Usual?: Feminism and the “New Historicism” by Judith Newton: Summary and Critique

“History as Usual?: Feminism and the ‘New Historicism’” by Judith Newton first appeared in the journal Cultural Critique, No. 9 (Spring 1988), published by the University of Minnesota Press.

Introduction: “History as Usual?: Feminism and the “New Historicism” by Judith Newton

“History as Usual?: Feminism and the ‘New Historicism’” by Judith Newton first appeared in the journal Cultural Critique, No. 9 (Spring 1988), published by the University of Minnesota Press. In this influential article, Newton interrogates the rise of the New Historicism within literary studies, critiquing its failure to account for the foundational contributions of feminist theory and feminist historiography. She challenges the marginalization of feminist scholars in the narrative of postmodern literary theory and contends that feminist criticism not only anticipated many of the assumptions later associated with New Historicism—such as the cultural construction of subjectivity and the historicity of representation—but often did so from a more politically engaged and socially transformative position. Newton argues that feminist critics had long explored how power, gender, and ideology shaped historical narratives and literary production, and she calls for a broader, more inclusive definition of New Historicism—one that integrates feminist insights and refuses the erasure of women’s intellectual labor. The essay is widely considered a key intervention in literary theory, urging scholars to recognize the political stakes of theoretical practice and to engage in more inclusive historiographies of criticism.

Summary of “History as Usual?: Feminism and the “New Historicism” by Judith Newton

🔑 Key Ideas from Judith Newton’s “History as Usual?: Feminism and the ‘New Historicism'”

🔹 1. New Historicism’s Ambiguous Identity

Newton critiques the vagueness and internal contradictions in defining “new historicism,” noting it is “as marked by difference as by sameness” (Newton, 1988, p. 87).
She asks whether it’s “a unique and hot commodity” or simply a “set of widely held, loosely ‘postmodernist’ assumptions” (p. 87).

🔹 2. Core Assumptions of New Historicism

Practitioners assume “no transhistorical or universal human essence,” with subjectivity “constructed by cultural codes” (p. 88).
Representations are not neutral; they “make things happen” by “shaping human consciousness” (p. 89).

🔹 3. Feminist Scholarship’s Exclusion from New Historicist Narratives

Newton criticizes how feminist contributions have been omitted from histories of theory and new historicism, despite feminist theory’s foundational role (p. 91).
Feminists “have sometimes participated in this erasure of their own intellectual traditions” (p. 92).

🔹 4. Feminist Origins of Postmodern Assumptions

Feminist thought contributed to “postmodernist” critiques before French theory was widely embraced, often rooted in “personal change and commitment” (p. 94).
These ideas, rooted in activism and experience, fostered a “sense of political possibilities” (p. 94).

🔹 5. Feminist Rearticulation of Theory

Feminist theorists developed distinctive takes on objectivity, proposing “situated and embodied knowledges” over relativism (p. 98).
They aim for “webs of connection, called solidarity in politics and shared conversation in epistemology” (p. 99).

🔹 6. Feminist History and the Redefinition of “History”

“New Women’s History” foregrounded the role of women as agents in history, challenging the public/private binary and masculinist historiography (p. 100).
Feminist historians revealed how “gender relations and gender struggle” shaped historical developments, often predating Foucault (p. 101).

🔹 7. Feminist Literary Criticism as Historical Practice

Feminist critics “situate literature in relation to history,” treating representation as “political” and deeply intertwined with gendered power (p. 104).
Historical readings by feminist literary scholars often emphasize “materialist” and interdisciplinary strategies (p. 105).

🔹 8. Gender as Central to Understanding Power

Feminist work redefines power not only as dominance but also “power in disguise,” such as resistance, silence, and emotional labor (p. 102).
This insight reframes power dynamics traditionally overlooked by male-centered models.

🔹 9. Feminism’s Potential to Transform New Historicism

Newton proposes that “materialist feminist literary/historical practice” yields a richer, more nuanced understanding of history and subjectivity (p. 117).
She argues for greater collaboration between feminists and cultural materialists to deepen historical analysis (p. 120).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “History as Usual?: Feminism and the “New Historicism” by Judith Newton

🌟 Term/Concept	📖 Explanation	🔍 Usage in the Article
🌀 New Historicism	A literary-critical movement that sees literature as embedded within cultural, social, and political discourses.	Newton explores whether it is a unified school or a broad set of postmodernist strategies. She critiques its emerging orthodoxy and exclusion of feminist histories.
♀️ Feminist Theory	Critical approaches grounded in the analysis of gender inequality and the representation of women.	Newton insists feminist theory shaped “postmodern” assumptions and calls out its omission in new historicist narratives.
🧠 Subjectivity	The ways in which individuals are shaped by and internalize cultural codes and social norms.	Feminism brought focus to how women’s subjectivity is constructed differently and often invisibly in history.
📜 Postmodernism	A skeptical, anti-essentialist stance toward grand narratives, objectivity, and fixed meanings.	Newton aligns feminist critique with postmodernist assumptions but argues for feminism’s distinct articulation.
🧱 Cultural Materialism	A British form of Marxist literary criticism that views literature as a material product of culture and ideology.	Mentioned as a cousin to new historicism; Newton emphasizes feminism’s deeper roots and more intersectional critique.
🔄 Cross-cultural Montage	Juxtaposition of literary and non-literary texts to reveal ideological interrelations.	Newton shows how feminists had already been doing this with diaries, manuals, legal records, etc., before new historicism labeled it.
📚 Representation	The depiction or construction of reality through language, images, or discourse.	Newton insists that representation has material consequences and is a site of ideological struggle.
💬 Hegemonic Ideology	Dominant worldviews that naturalize power structures.	Newton critiques how non-feminist new historicism overemphasizes hegemony, underplaying resistance and female agency.
🔥 Social Change & Agency	The potential for individuals or groups to transform society.	Central to Newton’s feminist critique — she shows how feminism models social change and not just cultural reproduction.
🚪 Marginalization	The social process of relegating groups to the edge of cultural, political, or academic discourse.	Newton critiques how feminist work has been marginalized in academic histories of theory like deconstruction and new historicism.

Contribution of “History as Usual?: Feminism and the “New Historicism” by Judith Newton to Literary Theory/Theories

1. 📚 New Historicism

📌 Contribution:
Newton critiques the notion that New Historicism is a neutral or revolutionary academic practice. She shows how it marginalizes feminist contributions, portraying it as a male-dominated project that reinvents ideas feminists were already working with.