Category: Theory Article Summaries

Introduction: “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

“Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan first appeared in Silex Scintillans (1650), a collection of deeply spiritual and metaphysical poetry reflecting Vaughan’s religious devotion and mysticism. The poem celebrates the birth of Christ with joyous and reverent imagery, portraying nature as responding to the miracle of the Nativity. Vaughan uses vibrant metaphors, comparing Christ’s arrival to the dawn (“The Sun doth shake / Light from his locks”), emphasizing divine illumination. The poem’s popularity stems from its heartfelt combination of praise, personal longing, and penitence. The speaker initially calls for joyful worship (“Awake, glad heart! get up and sing!”), but then shifts to an introspective tone, expressing a desire to be pure enough to receive Christ (“I would I had in my best part / Fit rooms for thee!”). The final stanza invokes Christ’s cleansing power, reflecting a key Christian theme of redemption (“Yet, if thou wilt, thou canst make clean”). This blend of jubilation and humility, characteristic of Vaughan’s style, continues to resonate with readers drawn to its lyrical celebration of Christ’s transformative presence.

Text: “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

Annotations: “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

Literary And Poetic Devices: “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

Themes: “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

• Spiritual Awakening and Rebirth: Henry Vaughan’s poem “Christ’s Nativity” emphasizes the theme of spiritual awakening and rebirth, urging both the speaker and the reader to rise and rejoice in the birth of Christ. The poem repeatedly calls for awakening, as seen in the refrain, “Awake! awake!”, which conveys a sense of urgency and excitement. The speaker implores the heart to “get up and sing!” as if the birth of Christ demands not just recognition but an active, joyful response. This awakening is not merely physical but deeply spiritual, urging humanity to acknowledge the significance of Christ’s arrival. The reference to “Man is their high-priest, and should rise / To offer up the sacrifice.” further underscores the idea that humankind has a responsibility to worship and honor the divine. Vaughan’s use of vibrant imagery, such as “The Sun doth shake / Light from his locks”, enhances the theme by depicting the entire world as responding to Christ’s birth with illumination and renewal.
• The Contrast Between Sin and Purity: In “Christ’s Nativity”, Vaughan explores the stark contrast between sin and purity, reflecting on the speaker’s unworthiness in comparison to Christ’s holiness. The speaker longs for a state of purity, lamenting, “But I am all filth, and obscene; / Yet, if thou wilt, thou canst make clean.” This admission of sinfulness is contrasted with the image of Christ’s humble yet spotless birth in a manger: “Fit rooms for thee! or that my heart / Were so clean as / Thy manger was!” Here, Vaughan uses the manger as a symbol of simplicity and divine purity, contrasting it with the speaker’s impure soul. This juxtaposition highlights a core Christian belief—that humanity is inherently sinful but can be purified through Christ. The plea for redemption, “Cure him, ease him, / O release him!”, reinforces the idea that salvation is possible only through divine grace, emphasizing the transformative power of Christ’s presence.
• The Majesty and Wonder of Christ’s Birth: Vaughan’s poem “Christ’s Nativity” celebrates the majesty and wonder of Christ’s birth, portraying it as an event that transforms the entire world. The natural elements—sun, wind, and water—are depicted as rejoicing in Christ’s coming, as in, “The Sun doth shake / Light from his locks, and all the way / Breathing perfumes, doth spice the day.” This personification of nature underscores the cosmic significance of the Nativity, suggesting that even the physical world acknowledges Christ’s divine presence. The line “Winds whisper, and the busy springs / A concert make;” further enhances the theme, presenting nature as participating in a grand, harmonious celebration. Vaughan’s imagery evokes a sense of divine orchestration, reinforcing the idea that Christ’s birth is not just a human event but a celestial and universal one, inspiring all of creation to praise Him.
• Longing for a Closer Connection with the Divine: Throughout “Christ’s Nativity”, Vaughan expresses a deep longing for a closer connection with Christ, using metaphors of flight and elevation to depict spiritual yearning. The speaker wishes to be a bird or a star, stating, “I would I were some bird, or star, / Flutt’ring in woods, or lifted far / Above this inn / And road of sin!” This desire to escape the burdens of earthly existence and be closer to God reflects a common theme in Christian poetry—aspiring to transcend worldly struggles in favor of divine communion. The contrast between the “inn and road of sin” and the freedom of the bird or star suggests that earthly life is weighed down by sin, while spiritual elevation brings one closer to God. By expressing this yearning, Vaughan not only conveys his own devotion but also invites the reader to seek a similar closeness with Christ, reinforcing the poem’s overarching message of redemption and faith.

Literary Theories and “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

Critical Questions about “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

• How does Vaughan use imagery to emphasize the divine significance of Christ’s birth?
• Henry Vaughan employs vivid natural imagery to emphasize the divine significance of Christ’s birth, portraying the entire universe as responding joyfully to the Nativity. The personification of the sun in “The Sun doth shake / Light from his locks, and all the way / Breathing perfumes, doth spice the day.” suggests that even celestial bodies celebrate the arrival of Christ. The reference to “Winds whisper, and the busy springs / A concert make;” further reinforces this idea, illustrating nature as an active participant in divine worship. By using sensory details of light, sound, and fragrance, Vaughan elevates Christ’s birth beyond a historical event, portraying it as a cosmic transformation that affects all of creation. This approach aligns with Christian theology, which views Christ’s arrival as an event of universal significance, bringing light to a darkened world. Vaughan’s imagery not only beautifies the poem but also underscores the spiritual joy and renewal associated with the Nativity.
• What role does the theme of sin and purification play in the poem?
• The theme of sin and purification is central to “Christ’s Nativity,” as the speaker reflects on his own unworthiness in contrast to Christ’s divine purity. Vaughan presents a clear contrast between the holy and the sinful, as seen in “But I am all filth, and obscene; / Yet, if thou wilt, thou canst make clean.” Here, the speaker acknowledges human depravity but expresses faith that Christ has the power to cleanse and redeem. This sentiment is reinforced by the plea: “Cure him, ease him, / O release him!”, which echoes traditional Christian prayers for forgiveness. The image of Christ’s manger as a pure and holy space contrasts with the speaker’s impure heart: “Fit rooms for thee! or that my heart / Were so clean as / Thy manger was!”. This comparison implies that spiritual cleansing is necessary for Christ to dwell within a person’s heart. Vaughan presents salvation as both a divine gift and a personal longing, reinforcing the Christian belief that true purity comes only through Christ’s grace.
• How does Vaughan use repetition and structure to reinforce the poem’s central message?
• Vaughan’s use of repetition and structure in “Christ’s Nativity” reinforces the poem’s themes of spiritual awakening and devotion. The repeated command “Awake! awake!” serves as both a call to action and a spiritual imperative, urging the reader to recognize and celebrate the significance of Christ’s birth. The repetition mirrors the joyful urgency of the Nativity, as if the entire world must respond instantly. Additionally, the balanced structure of the poem, with its regular rhyme scheme and rhythmic lines, contributes to a sense of order and harmony, reflecting the divine order Christ’s birth brings to the world. The refrain-like quality of certain phrases, such as “Awake, awake!” and “Cure him, ease him, / O release him!”, creates a musical, prayer-like effect, emphasizing the poem’s role as an act of worship and supplication. Vaughan’s structural choices thus ensure that the reader is not merely observing but actively engaging in the poem’s spiritual message.
• In what ways does the poem express a longing for spiritual transcendence?
• Vaughan expresses a deep longing for spiritual transcendence in “Christ’s Nativity,” particularly through metaphors of flight and elevation. The speaker expresses a desire to escape the sinful world, stating, “I would I were some bird, or star, / Flutt’ring in woods, or lifted far / Above this inn / And road of sin!”. Here, the bird and star symbolize spiritual ascension, contrasting with the earthly “inn and road of sin”, which represent human mortality and corruption. The speaker wishes to exist in a state of perpetual worship, as seen in “Then either star or bird should be / Shining or singing still to thee.”. This suggests a longing for constant devotion, where the speaker is no longer weighed down by earthly struggles. Vaughan conveys the idea that true fulfillment is found not in the material world but in spiritual unity with Christ. This theme aligns with Christian mysticism, which often emphasizes the soul’s yearning to escape earthly constraints and find divine peace.

Literary Works Similar to “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

1. “On the Morning of Christ’s Nativity” by John Milton – This poem, like Vaughan’s, celebrates Christ’s birth using grand, celestial imagery and explores the cosmic significance of the Nativity.
2. “A Hymn on the Nativity” by Richard Crashaw – Similar to Vaughan’s poem, this work expresses reverence for Christ’s humble birth and contrasts divine purity with human sinfulness.
3. “Christmas” by George Herbert – This poem, like “Christ’s Nativity,” reflects on the personal and spiritual transformation that Christ’s birth brings to humanity.

Representative Quotations of “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

Suggested Readings: “Christ’s Nativity” by Henry Vaughan

1. Taylor, Jeremy. “Jeremy Taylor and Henry Vaughan: The Stock of Nature and Art.” Gifts and Graces: Prayer, Poetry, and Polemic from Lancelot Andrewes to John Bunyan (2021): 49.
2. Kermode, Frank. “The Private Imagery of Henry Vaughan.” The Review of English Studies, vol. 1, no. 3, 1950, pp. 206–25. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/510360. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
3. Clough, Wilson O. “Henry Vaughan and the Hermetic Philosophy.” PMLA, vol. 48, no. 4, 1933, pp. 1108–30. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/458199. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
4. Underwood, Horace H. “Time and Space in the Poetry of Vaughan.” Studies in Philology, vol. 69, no. 2, 1972, pp. 231–41. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4173761. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
5. Durr, Robert Allen. “Vaughan’s Theme and Its Pattern: ‘Regeneration.’” Studies in Philology, vol. 54, no. 1, 1957, pp. 14–28. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4173187. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill

“Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill first appeared in Women’s Studies Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 3, in the Fall of 1981. Published by the Feminist Press at the City University of New York, this article critically examines how racism operates within literary traditions, particularly through the assumption that whiteness represents a universal human experience while other racial identities are treated as deviations. Gambill argues that the literary canon, often shaped by white male perspectives, imposes a false standard of “universality” that excludes the experiences of Black writers and other marginalized voices. Drawing from Robert E. Hemenway’s biography of Zora Neale Hurston, she highlights how even accomplished Black authors like Gwendolyn Brooks have been pressured to transcend race in their writing to be considered truly “universal.” Gambill critiques this standard, pointing out that white writers are seldom required to address their racial identity, whereas writers of color are expected to either erase their cultural identity or be relegated to a niche audience. The article also connects this issue to feminist literary criticism, emphasizing how women writers face similar dismissals when their work is labeled as trivial or overly personal. Gambill challenges white feminists to recognize and dismantle the racial biases embedded in literary criticism, urging for a more inclusive understanding of universality—one that embraces diverse cultural perspectives rather than reinforcing the dominance of whiteness. This analysis remains significant in contemporary literary theory, as it underscores the ongoing struggle for racial and gender equity in the representation and valuation of literature.

Summary of “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill

Contribution of “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill

Criticism Against “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill

Representative Quotations from “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Racism and “Universality” in Literature” by Sue Gambill

1. Gambill, Sue. “Racism and” Universality” in Literature.” (1981).
2. CORLETT, J. ANGELO. “What Is Racism?” Race, Racism, and Reparations, Cornell University Press, 2003, pp. 62–93. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctv3s8pkg.8. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
3. Corlett, J. Angelo. “Analyzing Racism.” Public Affairs Quarterly, vol. 12, no. 1, 1998, pp. 23–50. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40436005. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
4. Colarusso, Dana M. “Rhyme and Reason: Shakespeare’s Exceptional Status and Role in Canadian Education.” Shakespeare and Canada: Remembrance of Ourselves, edited by Irena R. Makaryk and Kathryn Prince, University of Ottawa Press, 2017, pp. 215–40. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1n2tv7r.16. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez

“Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez first appeared in The English Journal, Vol. 58, No. 1, in January 1969. Published by the National Council of Teachers of English and accessible through JSTOR, this article explores how literature serves as a means of fostering empathy and deeper understanding of the African American experience. Arnez argues that while direct personal experience is the most authentic way to grasp racial realities, literature provides the next best alternative by allowing readers to vicariously experience the struggles, aspirations, and cultural expressions of Black Americans. Drawing from works by James Baldwin, Langston Hughes, Richard Wright, and Malcolm X, the article illustrates how literature reveals the social injustices, economic hardships, and systemic discrimination faced by African Americans, while also showcasing their resilience and humanity. Arnez emphasizes that literature is not just a tool for aesthetic appreciation but a vital means of social education, capable of dismantling prejudices by presenting authentic voices and lived experiences. By highlighting shared human emotions—pain, ambition, love, and struggle—literature fosters racial empathy and challenges stereotypes, making it an essential bridge for communication between Black and non-Black communities. In literary theory, this perspective underscores the power of literature as a cultural and sociological artifact, one that shapes and reshapes societal perceptions of race and identity. Arnez’s work remains an important contribution to discussions on race, literature, and education, advocating for a more inclusive and socially conscious literary curriculum.

Summary of “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez

Contribution of “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez

Criticism Against “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez

Representative Quotations from “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Racial Understanding through Literature” by Nancy L. Arnez

1. Arnez, Nancy L. “Racial understanding through literature.” English Journal 58.1 (1969): 56-61.
2. Headlee, Judy Anne. “An Educational Approach to Negro Individualism.” The English Journal, vol. 59, no. 1, 1970, pp. 34–39. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/811727. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
3. Arnez, Nancy L. “Racial Understanding through Literature.” The English Journal, vol. 58, no. 1, 1969, pp. 56–61. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/812347. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
4. Small, Robert Coleman. “Negro Literature in High School English: Three Reasons for Its Use.” The High School Journal, vol. 54, no. 8, 1971, pp. 475–83. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40365671. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller

“Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller first appeared in The Journal of Negro Education in the Spring of 1949 (Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 134-137). In this article, Miller explores how racial and nationalistic biases can act as obstacles in the study and teaching of literature, particularly within classical studies. He argues that literature, often perceived as a neutral academic subject, is deeply influenced by national and racial biases that shape the perspectives of both educators and students. Miller highlights how historical narratives, particularly in Greek and Roman literature, reflect aristocratic and imperialist ideologies that may alienate students, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. He underscores how certain canonical texts, traditionally taught in schools, uphold Eurocentric perspectives, often reinforcing social hierarchies. Instead of erasing or avoiding such biases, Miller suggests a more inclusive approach: selecting texts that emphasize broader humanistic values, such as the Stoic writings of Seneca, which resonate with contemporary democratic ideals. He critiques the tendency to romanticize certain civilizations while ignoring their moral contradictions, urging educators to adopt a critical and reflective approach in teaching literature. Ultimately, his work calls for a shift in literary pedagogy—one that acknowledges historical biases while fostering an inclusive and critical engagement with classical texts. Through this analysis, Miller contributes significantly to literary theory and educational reform, advocating for a more equitable and conscious approach to the study of literature.

Summary of “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller

1. The Presence of Racial and Nationalistic Bias in Literary Studies
   • Miller argues that racial and nationalistic biases often influence the study and interpretation of literature. He illustrates this through Heinrich Heine’s observation that people struggle with reconciling great literary figures with their national or racial identities (Miller, 1949, p. 134).
   • These biases shape literary criticism, as Miller notes that “the judgment of the reviewer was finally determined by a racial or nationalistic bias” (p. 134).
2. Challenges in Teaching Literature to Adolescents
   • The presence of prejudice in literature is particularly problematic for young students, as their “mind-set” is still developing and can be influenced by nationalist or racial biases (p. 134).
   • Historical contexts shape students’ perceptions, as seen in the resistance to learning German after World War I due to nationalistic tensions (p. 135).
3. Nationalistic Influences in Classical Literature
   • Even in ancient literature, nationalistic biases exist. Miller points out that Socrates, in some Western narratives, is portrayed as an English or French intellectual figure rather than a Greek philosopher (p. 135).
   • This reflects a pattern of glorifying certain cultures over others: “Socrates, returned to life, finds his home at last at Oxford or Cambridge and perhaps becomes a British subject” (p. 135).
4. Selective Favoritism in Classical Studies
   • The study of Greek and Roman literature has been shaped by national and political agendas, as seen in how Julius Caesar was glorified in Germany while Cicero and Demosthenes were disparaged to fit nationalist narratives (p. 136).
   • Latin teachers before World War II often returned from Italy with enthusiasm for Roman ruins but also admiration for Mussolini’s classical revival, failing to separate scholarship from politics (p. 136).
5. The Problem of Tradition in Teaching Classical Literature
   • Classical literature often reinforces aristocratic and elitist perspectives, alienating students from marginalized backgrounds. Miller notes, “The traditional subject matter is essentially the literature of an aristocratic society, and the social institution of slavery is accepted without apology” (p. 136).
   • The dominant literary tradition favors an upper-class viewpoint, making it difficult for students to relate to characters and narratives (p. 136).
6. Conflicting Perspectives on Historical Figures
   • Students from diverse backgrounds may identify with historical figures in ways that challenge traditional interpretations. Miller observes that for some students, “Spartacus may appear as good and as honest… Ariovistus is to them more of a champion of liberty than Caesar; Jugurtha, the African prince, is more of a hero than Marius” (p. 136).
   • This disrupts the conventional Eurocentric perspective, which presents figures like Caesar and Cicero as heroes (p. 136).
7. Solutions: Reforming the Teaching of Classical Literature
   • Instead of censoring texts, Miller advocates for broader representation of humane and democratic voices, such as the Stoic philosopher Seneca, whose writings on slavery and human dignity resonate with modern audiences (p. 137).
   • He states, “His letter to Lucilius depicting how to treat those who are called slaves has no hurdles in it” (p. 137), suggesting that such perspectives can counterbalance the elitism in classical studies.
8. The Role of the Educator in Addressing Bias
   • Teachers must remain impartial and critically engage with texts rather than championing a nationalistic or elitist perspective (p. 137).
   • Miller insists, “The teacher must be a humanitarian as well as a humanist, guided by the old motto from Terence: Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto” (p. 137), emphasizing the need for inclusivity and critical thought in education.

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller

Contribution of “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Postcolonial Literary Theory – Addressing Eurocentrism in Literature
   • Miller critiques the Eurocentric bias in literary studies, highlighting how Western educational traditions privilege European literary figures and cultural narratives.
   • He states, “Socrates, returned to life, finds his home at last at Oxford or Cambridge and perhaps becomes a British subject” (Miller, 1949, p. 135), indicating how classical figures are appropriated to fit Western nationalist ideologies.
   • His argument aligns with postcolonial critiques of how literature is taught in ways that reinforce cultural hegemony.
2. Reader-Response Theory – The Role of Identity in Literary Interpretation
   • Miller emphasizes that students’ personal backgrounds shape how they relate to historical and literary figures.
   • He notes, “Spartacus may appear as good and as honest to them as M. Licinius Crassus; Ariovistus is to them more of a champion of liberty than Caesar; Jugurtha, the African prince, is more of a hero than Marius” (p. 136).
   • This supports the reader-response theory by arguing that meaning in literature is co-constructed by the reader’s identity and social positioning.
3. Cultural Studies – Literature as a Reflection of Social Power Structures
   • Miller examines how literary traditions reinforce existing social hierarchies, particularly in the case of Latin and Greek studies, which have been associated with elitism and aristocratic values.
   • He states, “The traditional subject matter is essentially the literature of an aristocratic society, and the social institution of slavery is accepted without apology” (p. 136).
   • This contributes to cultural studies by exposing how literature can sustain and legitimize power structures.
4. Ideological State Apparatus (Althusser) – Education as a Tool of Ideological Control
   • Miller highlights how educational traditions reinforce specific political and ideological viewpoints, sometimes unintentionally.
   • He critiques how Latin education has been historically aligned with elite social classes, stating, “There is an atmosphere surrounding the classics which has been called the genteel tradition” (p. 137).
   • This aligns with Althusser’s concept of the Ideological State Apparatus, where education perpetuates dominant ideologies.
5. Historiographic Metafiction – Challenging Established Literary Narratives
   • Miller challenges traditional literary histories that glorify figures like Julius Caesar while neglecting or marginalizing perspectives that challenge imperialist narratives.
   • He notes, “We in America followed the Germans too readily in their estimates of Demosthenes, Caesar, and Cicero” (p. 136), suggesting that historical literary criticism is shaped by political circumstances.
   • His perspective contributes to historiographic metafiction by questioning how history is selectively narrated in literature.
6. Liberation Pedagogy (Paulo Freire) – Literature and Social Justice in Education
   • Miller advocates for a more inclusive and critical approach to literature that empowers students from diverse backgrounds.
   • He asserts, “The teacher must be a humanitarian as well as a humanist, guided by the old motto from Terence: Homo sum: humani nihil a me alienum puto” (p. 137).
   • This supports liberation pedagogy, which calls for education to serve as a tool for social equity and consciousness-raising.
7. Canon Formation and Deconstruction – Questioning Traditional Literary Selection
   • Miller challenges the rigid canon of classical literature, arguing for a broader selection of texts that reflect more diverse and humane perspectives.
   • He suggests that educators should give more space to writers like Seneca, who provide ethical and philosophical perspectives that resonate with modern students (p. 137).
   • This aligns with deconstructionist critiques of the literary canon, which argue that it reflects exclusionary cultural values.

Examples of Critiques Through “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller

Criticism Against “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller

1. Lack of Concrete Pedagogical Solutions
   • While Miller identifies racial and nationalistic biases in literature, he does not provide clear, actionable solutions for educators beyond suggesting a more humanistic approach.
   • Critics may argue that simply advocating for a broader selection of texts (e.g., Seneca instead of Caesar) does not fundamentally challenge the structures that perpetuate bias in literary education.
2. Overgeneralization of Student Reactions
   • Miller assumes that students from marginalized backgrounds will inherently align with non-Roman historical figures such as Spartacus or Jugurtha over Roman leaders.
   • This perspective risks essentializing student experiences rather than allowing for individual and diverse interpretations of literature.
3. Romanticization of Certain Classical Figures
   • While Miller critiques the glorification of figures like Julius Caesar, he does not fully interrogate whether his own preference for writers like Seneca is similarly influenced by ideological biases.
   • His claim that Seneca’s Stoic philosophy is more accessible and relevant to modern students assumes a universal moral appeal that may not be as inclusive as he suggests.
4. Neglect of the Complexity of National Identity in Literature
   • Miller views nationalistic interpretations of literature as a hurdle but does not sufficiently explore how national identity can also be a productive lens for literary analysis.
   • Critics might argue that nationalistic readings do not always lead to exclusion or bias; rather, they can deepen historical and cultural understanding when approached critically.
5. Failure to Acknowledge the Role of Literary Criticism and Theory
   • Miller critiques literary education primarily from a pedagogical perspective but does not engage deeply with existing literary theories that address bias, such as Marxist or postcolonial criticism.
   • His work could have been strengthened by integrating theoretical frameworks that explicitly analyze power dynamics in literature.
6. Potentially Dismissive of the Canon’s Value
   • While Miller advocates for a more inclusive literary curriculum, he does not fully acknowledge the scholarly and historical reasons why certain classical works have been prioritized.
   • Critics may argue that instead of de-emphasizing canonical texts, the focus should be on teaching them with critical perspectives that acknowledge their limitations and biases.
7. Overemphasis on Classical Literature
   • Although Miller critiques classical literature’s elitist and aristocratic nature, he does not advocate strongly for the inclusion of non-Western literary traditions.
   • His argument remains confined to Greek and Roman texts rather than proposing a more radical expansion of the literary canon to include African, Asian, and indigenous narratives.
8. Limited Discussion on Contemporary Literature and Education
   • Miller focuses primarily on historical literary traditions but does not extend his analysis to contemporary literature, which may also reflect nationalistic and racial biases.
   • A broader discussion of how modern literature can challenge or reinforce these biases would make his argument more relevant to contemporary literary studies.

Representative Quotations from “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature” by Philip S. Miller

1. Miller, Philip S. “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature.” The Journal of Negro Education 18.2 (1949): 134-137.
2. Miller, Philip S. “Racial and Nationalistic Hurdles in the Teaching of Literature.” The Journal of Negro Education, vol. 18, no. 2, 1949, pp. 134–37. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2966388. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
3. “The Complete Bibliography of ‘The Journal of Negro Education,’ 1932-2006.” The Journal of Negro Education, vol. 75, no. 2, 2006, pp. 73–318. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40037237. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft

“Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft first appeared in The Cambridge History of Postcolonial Literature, published by Cambridge University Press. This chapter explores the complex relationship between postcolonialism and postmodernism, highlighting their shared yet distinct approaches to literary and cultural theory. Ashcroft argues that while postmodernism deconstructs centralized master narratives, postcolonialism actively resists imperialist discourse, prioritizing the material realities of colonial oppression. A key distinction he makes is that the “post” in postmodernism signifies a stylistic shift, whereas in postcolonialism, it represents a critical reading practice that interrogates power structures and histories of domination. Through references to thinkers such as Homi Bhabha, Gayatri Spivak, and Edward Said, Ashcroft outlines how postcolonial theory appropriates postmodern strategies—like deconstruction, mimicry, and irony—without relinquishing its political commitment to justice and emancipation. The chapter also examines the racialized underpinnings of imperialism, emphasizing how colonial ideologies constructed race as a tool of domination. Drawing from figures like W. E. B. Du Bois, Frantz Fanon, and the Négritude movement, Ashcroft illustrates how racial identity has been shaped by historical oppression and resistance. His work is significant in literary theory as it bridges the gap between postmodern skepticism and postcolonial activism, demonstrating how literature serves as a battleground for cultural representation and political struggle.

Summary of “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft

• Postcolonialism and Postmodernism: A Complex Relationship
  • Ashcroft explores the intricate relationship between postcolonialism and postmodernism, emphasizing their simultaneous contestation and overlap. He argues that while postmodernism focuses on deconstructing master narratives, postcolonialism actively resists imperial discourse (Ashcroft, p. 13).
  • “Whereas the ‘post’ in literary postmodernism may refer to a way of writing, the ‘post’ in postcolonialism refers to a way of reading” (p. 13).
• Distinction in Goals and Methods
  • Postmodernism seeks to dismantle centralized, logocentric European narratives, whereas postcolonialism aims to “dismantle the Centre/Margin binarism of imperial discourse” (p. 14).
  • Postcolonial theory does not propose a universalist ontology but instead critiques the material and discursive realities of colonial oppression (p. 15).
• Political Commitment of Postcolonialism
  • Unlike postmodernism, which often rejects grand narratives and universalist theories, postcolonialism remains committed to justice and liberation (p. 15).
  • Ashcroft highlights Edward Said’s concept of “worldliness,” which emphasizes the necessity of acknowledging colonial and neocolonial oppression (p. 15).
• Postmodernism’s Influence on Postcolonial Theory
  • Despite differences, postcolonialism adopts postmodern techniques such as decentering discourse, language analysis, mimicry, and irony to subvert colonialist narratives (p. 14).
  • However, postcolonialism does not abandon the ethical imperative for justice, unlike some strands of postmodernist thought (p. 16).
• Race as a Colonial Construct
  • Ashcroft critiques the historical construction of race as a justification for European imperialism, stating that “before European racism, black people were not black” (p. 16).
  • Race is neither biologically nor socially fixed; it emerged as a colonial tool to categorize and subordinate peoples (p. 17).
• Critique of Postmodernism’s Handling of Race
  • Postmodernism, especially in literary and cultural studies, often neglects larger political and economic structures, reducing race to a discursive or linguistic concept (p. 18).
  • “The predominance of otherness postmodernism has led us to neglect the larger structures (political, economic, educational, etc.)” (p. 18).
• Racial Thinking and Colonialism
  • Ashcroft traces the origins of racial ideology to European philosophers such as Immanuel Kant and David Hume, who established a hierarchical framework of human difference based on skin color (p. 17).
  • Kant’s view that “so fundamental is the difference between the races of man […] it appears to be as great in mental capacities as in colour” exemplifies the racist foundations of Enlightenment thought (p. 17).
• Postcolonial Responses to Race: Du Bois, Négritude, and Fanon
  • W. E. B. Du Bois: His The Conservation of Races (1897) attempted to reconcile the contradiction between biological and socio-historical definitions of race while affirming Black identity (p. 21).
  • Négritude Movement: Led by Léopold Sédar Senghor and Aimé Césaire, it reclaimed Black identity and culture as a form of resistance to colonialism. However, it was also criticized for its essentialist view of race (p. 23).
  • Frantz Fanon: His Black Skins, White Masks (1952) examined the psychological effects of racial subjugation, particularly the internalization of the colonial gaze (p. 27).
  • Fanon describes the alienation of Black identity, writing, “My body was given back to me sprawled out, distorted, recolored, clad in mourning in that white winter day” (p. 27).
• Race as a Relational Concept
  • Ashcroft argues that while race itself is a socially constructed fiction, the experience of racism is real and must be acknowledged (p. 28).
  • “Without racism, race would not have been invented” (p. 28).
• Postcolonialism’s Ethical Imperative
  • Unlike postmodernism, postcolonialism retains a vision of hope and agency, emphasizing the need for decolonization and racial justice (p. 28).
  • “Fanon’s final word is an affirmation of the necessity of a vision of hope for any project of postcolonial liberation” (p. 28).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft

Contribution of “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft

Criticism Against “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft

1. Oversimplification of Postmodernism vs. Postcolonialism
   • Ashcroft argues that postcolonialism is “unashamedly emancipatory” (p. 16) in contrast to postmodernism’s skepticism. However, critics argue that postmodernism itself has politically engaged strands, such as Lyotard’s critique of power structures, which Ashcroft does not fully acknowledge.
2. Ambiguity in Defining Postcolonialism
   • While Ashcroft asserts that “postcolonialism refers to post-invasion and not post-independence” (p. 13), this broad definition is problematic. It risks conflating vastly different historical experiences under a single theoretical umbrella, ignoring specific sociopolitical contexts.
3. Insufficient Engagement with Non-Anglophone Postcolonial Theory
   • Ashcroft predominantly engages with theorists writing in English (Said, Spivak, Bhabha) but does not sufficiently address contributions from non-Western intellectual traditions, such as Latin American decolonial thought (e.g., Aníbal Quijano, Walter Mignolo).
4. Tendency to Conflate Race and Colonialism
   • The text treats race as a colonial invention, arguing that “before European racism, black people were not black” (p. 16). While this aligns with Stuart Hall’s work, it risks downplaying pre-colonial conceptions of identity and racial hierarchies that existed outside European imperialism.
5. Limited Discussion of Economic Factors
   • While Ashcroft acknowledges capitalism’s role in colonialism (p. 17), he does not deeply explore economic dimensions such as dependency theory or world-systems analysis, which provide a more materialist critique of postcolonial conditions.
6. Problematic Engagement with Essentialism in Négritude
   • Ashcroft discusses Négritude as a form of “strategic essentialism” (p. 25), yet he does not fully address the internal critiques of Négritude from within African intellectual circles, such as critiques by Frantz Fanon and Wole Soyinka.
7. Underdeveloped Feminist and Gender Analysis
   • While postcolonialism has strong feminist strands (e.g., Spivak, Mohanty), Ashcroft’s discussion largely neglects gendered perspectives on colonialism, racialization, and postcolonial identity.
8. Lack of Engagement with Contemporary Postcolonial Realities
   • The text focuses on theoretical constructs but lacks detailed discussions of 21st-century neocolonialism, migration, and digital globalization, making its framework seem somewhat dated.
9. Potential Reduction of Race to Discourse
   • While Ashcroft critiques postmodernism’s tendency to treat race as a floating signifier (p. 22), some critics argue that his own approach does not sufficiently engage with how race functions in legal, institutional, and structural frameworks beyond literary discourse.
10. Limited Exploration of Indigenous Theorization
11. The book discusses colonialism largely through the lens of former British and French colonies but does not significantly incorporate Indigenous perspectives from settler-colonial contexts, such as North America or Australia.

Representative Quotations from “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Critical Histories: Postcolonialism, Postmodernism, and Race” by Bill Ashcroft

1. Platt, Len, and Sara Upstone, eds. Postmodern literature and race. Cambridge University Press, 2015.
2. GBOGI, TOSIN. “Is There Life Besides “Coloniality?”: Metapoetics and the Second Level of Decoloniality in Niyi Osundare’s Poetry.” Research in African Literatures, vol. 52, no. 3, 2021, pp. 139–66. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/48679341. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
3. Wade, Peter. “Blacks and Indigenous People in the Postmodern and Postcolonial Nation – and Beyond.” Race and Ethnicity in Latin America, Pluto Press, 2010, pp. 85–111. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt183p73f.10. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.
4. Aronowitz, Stanley. “Postmodernism and Politics.” Social Text, no. 18, 1987, pp. 99–115. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/488695. Accessed 16 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida

“Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida first appeared in an academic journal, discussing the profound impact of racial and cultural mixing on Brazilian literature and identity. The article explores how Brazil’s colonial history, marked by the Portuguese settlers’ interactions with Indigenous and African populations, created a unique social structure where racial integration, while not erasing prejudice, shaped the nation’s cultural and artistic development. Gomes de Almeida traces the representation of mixed-race individuals in Brazilian literature, from the 17th-century poetry of Gregório de Matos, who both admired and resented the presence of mulattos in society, to the 19th-century Romanticism of José de Alencar, who mythologized racial mixing through idealized narratives of Indigenous-European unions. The article highlights how realism and modernism further refined these portrayals, particularly in the works of Machado de Assis, a mulatto writer who became Brazil’s most esteemed literary figure, and Jorge Amado, who celebrated Afro-Brazilian culture in novels like Tenda dos Milagres. Through an analysis of these literary movements, Gomes de Almeida underscores how racial integration in Brazil, unlike in other post-colonial societies, became a defining literary theme, challenging European racial hierarchies and offering a distinct vision of national identity. The article is significant in literary theory as it emphasizes how literature not only reflects historical realities but actively participates in shaping the discourse on race and national identity.

Summary of “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida

• Historical Context of Racial Mixing in Brazil
  • Unlike English North America, Portuguese colonizers in Brazil arrived without families, leading to widespread intermixing with Indigenous and African women (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • This process created a racially mixed society, where the children of these unions often occupied an intermediate social space, forming an early working and artisan class (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • The mixed-race presence was reflected in early Brazilian art, such as the works of Aleijadinho (1738–1814) and Manuel da Costa Ataíde, who depicted a mulatto Virgin Mary in his paintings (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Early Literary Representations of Racial Mixing
  • In the 17th century, Gregório de Matos captured the paradoxical attitudes toward mixed-race people: while mulatto women were admired, mulatto men were satirized for competing with white elites (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • His poetry reflects both admiration for and anxiety about Brazil’s racial hybridity, illustrating an early awareness of race relations in the colony (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Romanticism and Indianist Myth-making
  • During the 19th century, José de Alencar idealized the fusion of Indigenous and European cultures in novels like O Guarani (1857) and Iracema (1865), presenting racial mixing as part of Brazil’s national identity (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • However, Africans were largely excluded from this nationalist myth due to the ongoing practice of slavery (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • In contrast, Bernardo Guimarães’ novel A Escrava Isaura (1875) depicted a nearly white mulatta as the heroine, demonstrating the reluctance to fully embrace blackness in literature (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Realist Literature and the Rise of Mixed-Race Intellectuals
  • The late 19th-century Realist movement addressed racial prejudice more directly, as seen in Aluísio Azevedo’s O Mulato (1881), which critiques the discrimination faced by educated mulattos (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • Machado de Assis, Brazil’s greatest writer and a dark-skinned mulatto, overcame racial barriers to become the first president of the Brazilian Academy of Letters, proving the ability of mixed-race individuals to integrate into elite society (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Euclides da Cunha and the Racial Debate
  • In Os Sertões (1902), Euclides da Cunha initially adopted racial theories that condemned racial mixing but later acknowledged the resilience of mixed-race people in the backlands of Brazil (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • This shift highlights the growing recognition of mestiçagem (racial mixing) as a defining characteristic of Brazilian identity (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Modernism and the Cultural Celebration of Racial Mixing
  • The 1920s Modernist Movement embraced Brazil’s racial and cultural hybridity, as exemplified by Mário de Andrade’s Macunaíma (1928), which uses indigenous and African myths to define Brazilian identity (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • Oswald de Andrade’s “Cannibalism” movement advocated for absorbing European influences while maintaining Brazil’s unique mixed heritage (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Jorge Amado and Afro-Brazilian Representation
  • Jorge Amado revolutionized Brazilian literature by centering Afro-Brazilian culture in novels like Jubiabá (1935) and Tenda dos Milagres (1969), which celebrated racial mixing as a national strength (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • His work marked a shift from seeing racial mixing as a social problem to viewing it as a source of cultural vitality (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
• Conclusion: Literature as a Reflection of Brazil’s Racial Identity
  • The long trajectory of Brazilian literature reflects evolving attitudes toward race, from early ambivalence to Romantic idealization, Realist critique, and Modernist celebration (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).
  • Writers like Alencar, Machado de Assis, Mário de Andrade, and Jorge Amado played key roles in shaping the discourse on racial integration, ultimately affirming mestiçagem as central to Brazilian identity (Gomes de Almeida, 2015).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida

Contribution of “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida

Criticism Against “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida

1. Overemphasis on Racial Harmony
   • Almeida portrays racial integration as a defining and largely positive aspect of Brazilian history but overlooks the deep and persistent racial inequalities that continue to exist.
   • The text sometimes minimizes the structural racism that shaped (and still shapes) Brazilian society, particularly in terms of economic and social mobility.
2. Limited Engagement with Postcolonial Theory
   • While Almeida discusses colonial racial mixing, he does not engage deeply with postcolonial critiques that address power imbalances and the lasting impact of European dominance.
   • The work does not fully explore how literature reflects colonial hegemonic ideologies, nor how Afro-Brazilian and Indigenous voices have been historically marginalized in literary traditions.
3. Romanticization of Racial Mixing
   • Almeida follows Gilberto Freyre’s notion of lusotropicalism, which idealizes Portuguese colonialism as more benevolent and open to racial mixing compared to other colonial powers.
   • Critics argue that this perspective downplays the violence, exploitation, and systemic oppression experienced by Afro-Brazilians and Indigenous peoples.
4. Neglect of Black Literary Voices
   • The text gives more weight to mixed-race and indigenous representation in literature while offering limited focus on Black-authored literary works that directly challenge racism.
   • Writers like Lima Barreto and Cruz e Souza, who explicitly dealt with racial identity and injustice, receive relatively less attention compared to Romantic and Modernist authors.
5. Essentialist Approach to Brazilian Identity
   • The work presents Brazilian identity as inherently mixed-race (mestiçagem), but this framing can obscure the ongoing racial stratification in Brazilian society.
   • The concept of a “unified Brazilian race” can be problematic, as it ignores the continued social exclusion of Afro-Brazilians and Indigenous communities.
6. Lack of Feminist and Gender Analysis
   • While discussing racial integration, the book does not critically analyze the role of gender, particularly how interracial relationships were often the result of colonial sexual violence.
   • The portrayal of Indigenous and Black women in literature is not sufficiently scrutinized in terms of how they were exoticized and objectified by white and male authors.
7. Absence of a Comparative Global Perspective
   • The book largely focuses on Brazil’s racial integration in isolation, without comparing it to similar processes in other former colonies such as the Caribbean or Latin America.
   • A broader comparative analysis could strengthen the argument by showing how Brazil’s experience fits into wider postcolonial and racial discourse.

Representative Quotations from “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Literature and Racial Integration” by José Mauricio Gomes de Almeida

1. Mauricio Gomes de Almeida, José. “Literature and Racial Integration.” Diogenes 48.191 (2000): 72-83.
2. Davis, Arthur P. “Integration and Race Literature.” Phylon (1940-1956), vol. 17, no. 2, 1956, pp. 141–46. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/272587. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.
3. Goff, Brian L., et al. “Racial Integration as an Innovation: Empirical Evidence from Sports Leagues.” The American Economic Review, vol. 92, no. 1, 2002, pp. 16–26. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3083319. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.
4. Jefferson, Ruth Bryant. “Some Obstacles to Racial Integration.” The Journal of Negro Education, vol. 26, no. 2, 1957, pp. 145–54. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2293340. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh

“Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh first appeared in The Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology in 2013. In this article, Frosh critically examines the entanglements between psychoanalysis and colonialism, emphasizing how psychoanalytic theory has historically been shaped by colonialist ideology and racist assumptions. He highlights Freud’s conception of the “primitive” or “savage” mind as a foundational problem, arguing that this terminology perpetuates a Eurocentric developmental hierarchy that aligns with colonialist thought (Frosh, 2013, p. 142). At the same time, Frosh acknowledges the potential of psychoanalysis to critique and dismantle colonialist discourse, particularly through its exploration of the “colonizing gaze” and the “racist imaginary.” He draws on Fanon’s (1952) seminal work, Black Skin, White Masks, to illustrate how psychoanalysis can be applied to postcolonial psychology, especially in understanding how racialized subjects internalize colonial oppression (p. 146). Frosh also discusses the tension between psychoanalysis as a tool of resistance and its historical complicity in reinforcing racial hierarchies, pointing out how its individualistic framework often neglects sociohistorical realities (p. 141). The article has gained popularity due to its critical engagement with both psychoanalysis and postcolonial theory, making a compelling case for their mutual relevance while also exposing the ideological blind spots within psychoanalytic thought. By incorporating perspectives from theorists such as Edward Said, Jacques Lacan, and Slavoj Žižek, Frosh’s work remains a significant contribution to contemporary debates on race, colonialism, and psychology (p. 152).

Summary of “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh

Contribution of “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh

Criticism Against “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh

1. Overgeneralization of Psychoanalysis’ Role in Colonialism
   • Frosh argues that psychoanalysis is deeply implicated in colonialist ideology, but some critics suggest he overgeneralizes Freud’s theories without considering their progressive potential.
   • Freud’s universalization of the unconscious could be seen as a critique of colonial binaries rather than a reinforcement (Freud, Totem and Taboo).
2. Limited Engagement with Contemporary Psychoanalytic Theories
   • While Frosh critiques classical psychoanalysis, he does not fully engage with modern revisions of psychoanalysis that challenge its colonialist past.
   • Postcolonial psychoanalysts, such as Homi Bhabha and Achille Mbembe, have reformulated psychoanalytic theories to resist colonial narratives, which Frosh does not explore in depth.
3. Potential Overemphasis on the “Racist Imaginary”
   • The concept of the racist imaginary (Frosh, 2013, p. 148) suggests that racism is largely the result of psychological projection, but critics argue that this perspective risks downplaying the material and structural dimensions of racism.
   • Social, economic, and political factors contribute significantly to colonial racism, beyond just unconscious psychological dynamics.
4. Binary View of Psychoanalysis as Both Oppressive and Subversive
   • Frosh simultaneously critiques psychoanalysis for its colonialist underpinnings while also claiming it can be subversive and critical.
   • Some critics argue this dual stance lacks clarity: Is psychoanalysis inherently colonial, or can it be fully repurposed for postcolonial critique?
5. Neglect of Alternative Psychological Frameworks
   • The article focuses on psychoanalysis as the primary psychological framework for analyzing colonialism, but other approaches such as cognitive psychology or indigenous psychology are largely ignored.
   • Alternative psychological perspectives could provide more nuanced insights into colonial trauma and resistance.
6. Underrepresentation of Non-Western Psychoanalytic Thought
   • Frosh’s discussion centers primarily on European psychoanalysts (Freud, Lacan, Žižek), while non-Western contributions to psychoanalytic thought are largely absent.
   • Critics argue that including African, Caribbean, and Asian psychoanalytic thinkers (e.g., Fanon’s contemporaries, Dalit psychoanalysis, African spiritual psychologies) would enrich the analysis.
7. Reliance on Freudian and Lacanian Psychoanalysis
   • The article heavily relies on Freud and Lacan’s theories, despite significant critiques of their Eurocentric and patriarchal biases.
   • Feminist and decolonial scholars have argued that other psychoanalytic traditions (e.g., Klein, Winnicott, Fanonian psychoanalysis) could offer a less colonialist perspective on subjectivity.
8. Insufficient Engagement with Indigenous Epistemologies
   • While the article critiques the colonialist framing of the “primitive mind,” it does not explore indigenous epistemologies as alternatives to psychoanalytic models.
   • A broader engagement with indigenous philosophies of mind, healing, and subjectivity could counterbalance the focus on Western psychoanalysis.

Representative Quotations from “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism” by Stephen Frosh

1. Frosh, Stephen. “Psychoanalysis, colonialism, racism.” Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 33.3 (2013): 141.
2. Frosh, Stephen. “Psychoanalysis, Colonialism, Racism.” A Deeper Cut: Further Explorations of the Unconscious in Social and Political Life, edited by David Morgan, Karnac Books, 2021, pp. 25–52. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.23338182.9. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.
3. FROSH, STEPHEN. “Towards a Psychosocial Psychoanalysis.” American Imago, vol. 73, no. 4, 2016, pp. 469–82. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26303653. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.
4. HOOK, DEREK. “The Primal Scene of Anti-Blackness: The Masochist Jouissance of White Racism.” The Comparatist, vol. 46, 2022, pp. 7–28. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27181573. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew

“Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew first appeared in the Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race in 2009 as part of the broader scholarly discussion on race and politics. This article critically examines the notion that Barack Obama’s election as the first African American president signified a “post-racial” America. Pettigrew challenges the idea that racism had diminished significantly, arguing instead that Obama’s victory resulted from a “perfect storm” of political conditions rather than a fundamental transformation in racial attitudes. The article highlights the persistence of racial prejudice, as demonstrated by white Southern and older voters’ reluctance to support Obama, and emphasizes the role of increased voter turnout among young and minority populations. In literary theory and political discourse, this work contributes to critical race studies by interrogating the narrative of progress often imposed on racial history. By exposing logical fallacies in post-racial arguments and using empirical data to reveal the complexities of racial attitudes, Pettigrew’s analysis aligns with scholarship that critiques optimistic yet superficial claims of racial equality. As referenced in the State of the Discipline, this article serves as an essential text in the study of race relations, political behavior, and the enduring structures of systemic inequality in the United States.

Summary of “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew

1. The Myth of Post-Racism
   • Pettigrew critiques the claim that Obama’s election signifies the end of racism in the U.S.
   • He argues that such views are overly optimistic and overlook systemic racial disparities (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 279).
   • The desire to declare racism as “solved” is an extension of historical tendencies to prematurely celebrate racial progress (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 280).
2. The “Perfect Storm” That Led to Obama’s Victory
   • Obama’s election was made possible by a unique confluence of events, not necessarily a shift in racial attitudes.
   • Factors included:
     • A well-run campaign
     • Economic downturn
     • Declining popularity of the Republican Party under George W. Bush
     • A highly favorable political climate (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 280).
   • Obama benefited from previous Black political progress and demographic shifts (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 281).
3. Racist Voters Still Supported Obama
   • Some white bigots voted for Obama due to the economic crisis, demonstrating that racial prejudice and voting decisions do not always align (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 282).
   • A survey found that 33% of white Democrats held negative racial stereotypes, yet 58% of them still voted for Obama (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 283).
   • Racism remained evident in other aspects, such as opposition to affirmative action and racially motivated legislative measures (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 284).
4. Logical Fallacies in the Post-Racism Argument
   • The ecological fallacy: Inferring individual racial attitudes from aggregate voting patterns is misleading (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 284).
   • The constant turnout composition fallacy: The assumption that the electorate remained the same as in 2004 is false; there was a significant increase in young, minority, and independent voters (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 285).
   • Obama’s slight improvement over Kerry’s white vote share (43% vs. 41%) does not indicate a racial transformation (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 285).
5. Racist Attitudes and Actions Persisted During the Campaign
   • Throughout Obama’s campaign, racist incidents were frequent:
     • Cross-burnings, threats, and racist graffiti (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 286).
     • Students chanting “assassinate Obama” on a school bus in Idaho (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 286).
     • A Republican club issuing fake $10 bills featuring Obama alongside a watermelon, ribs, and fried chicken (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 287).
   • High-profile figures, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign surrogates, played the “race card” by spreading rumors about Obama’s background (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 287).
6. White Southern and Elderly Voters Demonstrated Continued Racism
   • Older white voters (65+) were the only age group to vote more Republican in 2008 than in 2004 (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 287).
   • White support for Obama decreased in certain Southern states like Alabama and Mississippi (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 288).
   • These trends contradict claims that Obama’s election erased racial divisions (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 289).
7. The Role of Increased Minority and Youth Turnout
   • Key voter demographics:
     • Black voter turnout increased from 11% in 2004 to 13% in 2008.
     • Latino turnout increased from 6% to 8%, with 66% supporting Obama (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 289).
     • The under-30 vote shifted significantly toward Obama, showing a generational difference in racial attitudes (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 289).
8. Structural Racism Persists Despite Obama’s Victory
   • Obama’s election does not eliminate systemic racism in housing, employment, education, and criminal justice (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 290).
   • “The basic problems are structural—rampant housing segregation, poverty, job discrimination, poor education, massive imprisonment” (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 290).
   • Institutional racism remains embedded in American society and requires more than symbolic victories to overcome (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 291).
9. Concluding Thoughts: A Step Forward, Not the End of Racism
   • Obama’s presidency represents progress but not the end of racial discrimination (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 291).
   • “We are no longer ‘two nations,’ but neither are we a single, non-racialized nation” (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 291).
   • The fight for racial equality continues beyond the symbolic victory of a Black president (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 292).

Key Takeaways

• Obama’s election was historic but did not signal a “post-racial” America.
• Many white voters, including bigots, supported him for reasons unrelated to racial progress.
• Logical fallacies distort the perception that racism has significantly declined.
• Racist incidents and systemic inequalities persist.
• Future progress in race relations depends on structural changes, not just symbolic victories.

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew

Contribution of “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew

Criticism Against “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew

1. Overemphasis on Structural Racism Without Recognizing Individual Agency
   • Pettigrew focuses heavily on systemic barriers but underplays the role of individual actions in combating racism.
   • Critics may argue that while systemic racism persists, Obama’s presidency did signal progress in racial representation and leadership (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 291).
2. Dismissal of the Symbolic Importance of Obama’s Election
   • While Pettigrew critiques the “post-racism” narrative, he may downplay the psychological and cultural significance of a Black president for African Americans and other minority groups.
   • Representation in leadership can have real-world implications for racial perceptions, even if structural inequalities remain (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 291).
3. Neglect of Counterarguments from Optimistic Scholars
   • Pettigrew largely critiques post-racial advocates like John Tierney but does not engage deeply with scholars who acknowledge both racial progress and ongoing struggles.
   • His critique could be more balanced by discussing theories of incremental racial progress rather than suggesting that racism remains entirely unchanged (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 290).
4. Limited Consideration of Global and Comparative Perspectives
   • The analysis is centered on American race relations without broader comparisons to racial dynamics in other countries.
   • Pettigrew references Black European reactions to Obama’s win (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 289) but does not analyze how racial politics in other democracies might provide comparative insights.
5. Reliance on Quantitative Voting Data Without Nuanced Qualitative Analysis
   • While Pettigrew uses exit-poll data to show that white support for Obama was not necessarily indicative of racial progress (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 283), some critics argue that surveys do not capture changing racial attitudes in personal and professional spaces.
   • A more qualitative approach—such as interviews or discourse analysis—could provide deeper insight into shifting racial dynamics beyond voting patterns.
6. Potential Political Bias
   • Pettigrew critiques conservative narratives about post-racism but does not critically analyze how liberal political discourse may also contribute to performative racial progress rather than substantive change.
   • The Democratic Party’s role in perpetuating racial inequalities (e.g., mass incarceration policies under Clinton) is not extensively discussed.
7. Underestimation of Racial Progress Among Younger Generations
   • The argument that racism remains largely intact may not fully account for the generational shift toward greater racial acceptance among younger Americans (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 289).
   • Younger voters showed significantly higher levels of support for Obama, which could indicate meaningful racial progress rather than just a political alignment shift.
8. Rigid Binary Between Racist and Non-Racist Voters
   • Pettigrew highlights that many bigoted white voters still supported Obama (Pettigrew, 2009, p. 283), but this may oversimplify the complexities of racial attitudes.
   • Many voters may hold contradictory racial beliefs, where they acknowledge systemic racism but also support policies that perpetuate inequality.

Representative Quotations from “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Post-Racism? Putting President Obama’s Victory In Perspective” by Thomas F. Pettigrew

1. Pettigrew, Thomas F. “POST-RACISM?: Putting President Obama’s Victory in Perspective1.” Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 6.2 (2009): 279-292.
2. TUCH, STEVEN A., and MICHAEL HUGHES. “Whites’ Racial Policy Attitudes in the Twenty-First Century: The Continuing Significance of Racial Resentment.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 634, 2011, pp. 134–52. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/29779399. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.
3. Love, Bettina L., and Brandelyn Tosolt. “Reality or Rhetoric? Barack Obama and Post-Racial America.” Race, Gender & Class, vol. 17, no. 3/4, 2010, pp. 19–37. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41674749. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.
4. López, Ian F. Haney. “Post-Racial Racism: Racial Stratification and Mass Incarceration in the Age of Obama.” California Law Review, vol. 98, no. 3, 2010, pp. 1023–74. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/27896699. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.

Introduction: “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long

“Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andrew C. Long first appeared in Orientalism and Literature, edited by Geoffrey P. Nash, as part of the Cambridge Critical Concepts series, published by Cambridge University Press in 2019 (pp. 235–252). In this chapter, Long engages in a critical dialogue with Edward Said’s literary criticism, particularly examining the tension between Said’s postcolonial critique of imperialism and his engagement with canonical modernist writers such as Joseph Conrad and Albert Camus. Central to Long’s argument is Aijaz Ahmad’s critique, articulated in In Theory (1992), which accuses Said of absolving cosmopolitan writers of their racial biases while being more stringent in his critiques of overtly colonialist figures. Ahmad argues that Said’s privileging of European comparative literature and his selective application of contrapuntal reading limits his engagement with Third World writers and reinforces the intellectual hierarchy of Western literary traditions.

Long explores how Said’s intellectual formation, deeply influenced by Cold War cultural critique, shaped his interpretation of literary texts. He contrasts Said’s analysis of Heart of Darkness, where Said acknowledges Conrad’s critique of imperialism but hesitates to fully address its racialized representation of Africa, with Said’s reading of Camus’ The Stranger, which Said interprets as a text of liberal settler consciousness rather than outright racism. Chinua Achebe’s landmark critique of Conrad in An Image of Africa (1975) serves as a pivotal counterpoint in the debate, arguing that Heart of Darkness dehumanizes Africans and should not be upheld as a literary classic. Long further situates this discourse in contemporary postcolonial literary responses, such as Kamel Daoud’s The Meursault Investigation, which reimagines Camus’ novel from the perspective of the unnamed murdered “Arab” and interrogates the legacy of French colonialism.

The chapter highlights the broader implications of this debate for postcolonial literary studies, addressing whether texts that employ racist tropes can still be read as critiques of empire and how they should be approached in educational and critical contexts. Long ultimately argues for a nuanced contrapuntal reading that acknowledges the limitations of these canonical texts while resisting both their outright rejection and an uncritical valorization. His work contributes to ongoing discussions in literary theory regarding the ethics of reading, the role of race in modernist literature, and the politics of canon formation in postcolonial and decolonial studies.

Summary of “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long

Main Ideas

• Ahmad’s Critique of Said’s Literary Analysis
  • Aijaz Ahmad critiques Edward Said’s literary criticism in Orientalism and After (1992), arguing that Said absolves cosmopolitan modernist writers like Joseph Conrad and E.M. Forster of racism while critiquing others (Long, p. 235).
  • Ahmad claims Said’s work is shaped by Cold War intellectual traditions, particularly the influence of Lionel Trilling and Clement Greenberg (Long, p. 236).
• Said’s Engagement with Conrad and Camus
  • Said’s work, especially in Culture and Imperialism, focuses extensively on Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, yet he does not fully respond to Chinua Achebe’s condemnation of Conrad as a “thoroughgoing racist” (Long, p. 235).
  • Long compares Said’s treatment of Heart of Darkness with The Stranger by Albert Camus, arguing that while Conrad’s racism is overt, Camus’ novel represents “liberal settler consciousness” (Long, p. 235-236).
• Achebe’s Rejection of Conrad and the Defense of Heart of Darkness
  • Achebe denounces Heart of Darkness for its racist language and portrayal of Africans, calling it a work that questions “the very humanity of black people” (Long, p. 237).
  • Conrad scholars like Cedric Watts and Hunt Hawkins defend Heart of Darkness, arguing it critiques rather than perpetuates imperialism (Long, p. 238).
  • Some scholars argue Achebe misreads Conrad, while others acknowledge the novella’s racial biases but insist on its literary complexity (Long, p. 238).
• The Role of Contrapuntal Reading and Standpoint Theory
  • Long discusses Said’s contrapuntal reading strategy, which examines what is both “there and not there” in texts (Long, p. 241).
  • Said applies this method to Camus’ The Stranger, recognizing how the novel omits Algerian perspectives while framing French colonial subjects as universal figures (Long, p. 243).
  • Standpoint theory emerges as an essential lens in Said’s post-Orientalism work, where he examines literature from the perspective of historically marginalized groups (Long, p. 246).
• The Cold War Cultural Critique and Literary Canon Formation
  • Said’s preference for canonical texts aligns with Cold War cultural critique, which emphasized detachment, irony, and aesthetic independence from political ideology (Long, p. 245).
  • Literary critics like Trilling and Greenberg argue for an elite, high-art literary tradition, which influences Said’s approach to literature (Long, p. 245).
  • This tradition values writers like Conrad and Camus while marginalizing Third World writers, a criticism Ahmad levels against Said (Long, p. 236).
• Contemporary Postcolonial Reinterpretations
  • Kamel Daoud’s The Meursault Investigation (2015) offers a counter-narrative to Camus’ The Stranger, giving voice to the murdered “Arab” by telling the story from his brother’s perspective (Long, p. 247).
  • The novel critiques the colonial legacy of French Algeria and highlights the silencing of native voices in European literature (Long, p. 248).
• Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved?
  • Long concludes that cosmopolitan writers cannot be entirely absolved of racism; rather, their works should be critically examined through contrapuntal reading and postcolonial critique (Long, p. 248).
  • While Said does not explicitly condemn writers like Conrad and Camus, his analysis reveals how their works are implicated in colonialist and racist ideologies (Long, p. 249).
  • The debate extends into pedagogy: should works like Heart of Darkness still be taught, and if so, in what context? (Long, p. 249).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long

Contribution of “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long

Criticism Against “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long

1. Overemphasis on Said’s Intellectual Formation
   • Long attributes Said’s contradictions largely to Cold War cultural critique, particularly the influence of Lionel Trilling and Clement Greenberg, but underplays Said’s engagement with anti-colonial and Marxist thinkers like Frantz Fanon and Antonio Gramsci (Long, p. 236).
   • This reduces Said’s complex theoretical shifts to Cold War liberalism rather than acknowledging his later political radicalization.
2. Limited Engagement with Third-World Literature
   • Long critiques Said for favoring Western canonical writers over Third World authors (Long, p. 236), yet his own analysis remains focused on figures like Conrad, Camus, and Naipaul, engaging only briefly with writers like Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o and Kamel Daoud.
   • His work could benefit from more discussion of non-Western literary traditions and their critiques of cosmopolitanism.
3. Contradictions in the Evaluation of Cosmopolitan Writers
   • While Long argues that cosmopolitanism often masks Eurocentrism, he still engages with texts by cosmopolitan writers (e.g., Conrad, Camus, Naipaul) without fully exploring alternative postcolonial or indigenous literary frameworks (Long, p. 248).
   • His critique does not fully address whether all cosmopolitan intellectuals are inevitably implicated in colonial discourse or if some transcend these limitations.
4. Insufficient Discussion on Teaching Racist Texts
   • Long raises the issue of whether texts like Heart of Darkness should still be taught but does not provide a clear pedagogical framework for how they should be approached in the classroom (Long, p. 238).
   • His argument remains ambiguous on whether the contrapuntal method alone is enough to justify their continued inclusion in literary curricula.
5. Binary Framing of Postcolonial Criticism
   • His analysis sometimes frames postcolonial criticism as either moralistic denunciation (Ahmad) or contrapuntal critique (Said) without considering other methodologies (Long, p. 249).
   • This neglects alternative postcolonial approaches, such as decoloniality, that might offer more radical critiques beyond contrapuntal reading.
6. Neglects the Role of Gender in Literary Criticism
   • While engaging with race, colonialism, and class, Long does not address the role of gender and how colonial discourse intersects with representations of women in cosmopolitan literature (Long, p. 237).
   • His discussion of Heart of Darkness and The Stranger does not critically examine the portrayal of women in these texts, despite their importance in colonial narratives.

Representative Quotations from “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” by Andew C. Long

1. Long, Andrew C. “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?.” Orientalism and Literature.
2. Long AC. Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism? In: Nash GP, ed. Orientalism and Literature. Cambridge Critical Concepts. Cambridge University Press; 2019:235-252.
3. Long, Andrew C.. “Can the Cosmopolitan Writer Be Absolved of Racism?” Orientalism and Literature (2019): https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Can-the-Cosmopolitan-Writer-Be-Absolved-of-Racism-Long/1153134e6aab9606cd3038263805b3f2c938cf6f

Introduction: “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson

“Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson first appeared in Literature Compass in 2006. This article examines the evolution of race studies in early modern English literature, emphasizing its shift from a marginal subject to a crucial field in literary analysis. Floyd-Wilson highlights how earlier scholarship, such as Winthrop Jordan’s White Over Black (1968) and G.K. Hunter’s Othello and Colour Prejudice (1967), framed Renaissance racial discourse through typological interpretations, viewing blackness primarily as a symbol of sin and moral depravity. However, she critiques these perspectives for their oversimplified assumptions about Elizabethan xenophobia and the supposed instinctual aversion to blackness. The article also discusses how feminist scholarship in the late 1980s, particularly works by Karen Newman and Ania Loomba, integrated race and gender, revealing how the construction of racial identity in early modern England was deeply intertwined with class and patriarchy. Moreover, Floyd-Wilson underscores the necessity of examining race through interdisciplinary lenses, including religion, geography, and trade relations. She references scholars like Kim F. Hall, who demonstrated how the language of Renaissance literature played a crucial role in formulating racial and national identities, and Nabil Matar, whose studies on early English encounters with Islam challenge Eurocentric narratives of racial difference. Floyd-Wilson’s retrospective thus positions race studies as an indispensable framework for understanding English Renaissance literature, moving beyond simplistic racial binaries to explore the complexities of identity formation in the period.

Summary of “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson

• Development of Race Studies in Early Modern Literature
  • Over the last thirty years, race studies in Renaissance literature have evolved from a marginalized field to a central topic of scholarly inquiry (Floyd-Wilson 1044).
  • Early studies largely employed typological interpretations of blackness, viewing black figures in literature as symbolic representations of sin and moral degradation (1044).
  • The field has expanded beyond narrow frameworks to include perspectives from disciplines like science, geography, religion, and trade relations (1044).
• The Curse of Ham and Typological Interpretations of Blackness
  • The late 1960s marked an important period with foundational texts such as Winthrop D. Jordan’s White Over Black (1968) and G.K. Hunter’s Othello and Colour Prejudice (1967) (1044).
  • Hunter argued that Othello’s blackness was primarily a theatrical and typological device rather than an accurate reflection of Elizabethan encounters with Moors (1044).
  • Jordan posited that English racial attitudes predated the Atlantic slave trade, reinforcing a notion that white reactions to blackness were instinctive (1045).
  • Scholars such as Alden and Virginia Mason Vaughan have since critiqued Jordan’s claims, pointing out that English racial perceptions were shaped by sudden exposure to blackness rather than an inherent aversion (1045).
• Intersection of Race, Gender, and Class
  • Feminist scholarship in the late 1980s transformed Renaissance racial studies, examining racial identity alongside gender and class (1046).
  • Karen Newman argued that Desdemona and Othello were constructed through discourses on femininity and blackness that reinforced early modern ideas of racial and gendered difference (1046).
  • Ania Loomba’s Gender, Race, Renaissance Drama (1989) highlighted the interconnectedness of racial and gendered othering within white patriarchal society (1046).
  • Lynda Boose’s work demonstrated that black women were largely unrepresentable in English Renaissance literature, as their existence challenged dominant patriarchal narratives (1046).
• Religious Identity and the Concept of Race
  • Race in early modern England was often understood through religious frameworks, with blackness associated with non-Christian identities (1047).
  • James Shapiro’s Shakespeare and the Jews (1997) demonstrated how English identity formation was shaped by anxieties about religious difference (1047).
  • Daniel Vitkus’s work on Othello emphasized that English fears of conversion and conquest by Islamic forces influenced racial portrayals of Moors (1047).
  • Nabil Matar’s Turks, Moors, and Englishmen in the Age of Discovery (1999) provided archival evidence that English interactions with Muslim cultures were more extensive than previously thought, complicating simplistic racial binaries (1047).
• Geography, Science, and Racial Construction
  • Recent scholarship has turned to pre-colonial concepts of race and geography to challenge teleological readings of race and imperialism (1048).
  • Emily Bartels argued that Europeans constructed Africa as both a space of exoticism and familiarity, rather than simply an “Other” (1048).
  • Valerie Traub suggested that early modern maps and geographical treatises contributed to racial and cultural differentiation (1048).
  • Floyd-Wilson’s own work in English Ethnicity and Race in Early Modern Drama (2003) explores how geohumoral theories shaped English perceptions of blackness and whiteness (1048).
• Conclusion and Future Directions
  • The study of race in Renaissance literature has moved from a minor subtopic to a major interdisciplinary field (1049).
  • Future research is expected to further explore the intersections of race and religion, race and science, and transatlantic racial economies (1049).
  • Floyd-Wilson emphasizes that historicizing race requires both archival rigor and critical engagement with inherited myths (1049).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson

Contribution of “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson to Literary Theory/Theories

Examples of Critiques Through “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson

Criticism Against “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson

Representative Quotations from “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson with Explanation

Suggested Readings: “Moors, Race, and the Study of English Renaissance Literature: A Brief Retrospective” by Mary Floyd-Wilson

1. Floyd‐Wilson, Mary. “Moors, race, and the study of English renaissance literature: A brief retrospective.” Literature Compass 3.5 (2006): 1044-1052.
2. BRITTON, DENNIS AUSTIN. “Recent Studies in English Renaissance Literature.” English Literary Renaissance, vol. 45, no. 3, 2015, pp. 459–78. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/48634687. Accessed 12 Mar. 2025.
3. STANIVUKOVIC, GORAN V. “RECENT STUDIES OF ENGLISH RENAISSANCE LITERATURE OF THE MEDITERRANEAN.” English Literary Renaissance, vol. 32, no. 1, 2002, pp. 168–86. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24463713. Accessed 12 Mar. 2025.
4. Smith, Emma. “Race and Othello.” Othello, Liverpool University Press, 2005, pp. 28–48. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv5qdgmv.8. Accessed 12 Mar. 2025.
5. Mason, Philip. “Othello and Race Prejudice.” Caribbean Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 3, 1962, pp. 154–62. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40652820. Accessed 12 Mar. 2025.