“The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow: A Critical Analysis

“The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow first appeared in 1860 as part of his poetry collection The Seaside and the Fireside.

"The Children's Hour" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow: A Critical Analysis
Introduction: “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

“The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow first appeared in 1860 as part of his poetry collection The Seaside and the Fireside. The poem captures a tender, domestic moment that occurs “between the dark and the daylight,” as the poet takes a pause from his work to be joyfully ambushed by his three daughters, Alice, Allegra, and Edith. The main ideas revolve around paternal love, the innocence of childhood, and the joy of family life, conveyed through vivid imagery and a playful tone. The poet compares his study to a fortress and his daughters to mischievous invaders—”O blue-eyed banditti”—whose “raid” ends not in conquest but in laughter and affection. Their “attack” symbolizes not only their love but the power of childhood to penetrate adult seriousness. The poem’s popularity lies in its emotional warmth and relatable depiction of domestic joy, made timeless through metaphors like “the dungeon in the round-tower of my heart,” which becomes a symbol of eternal, unconditional love.

Text: “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Between the dark and the daylight,

      When the night is beginning to lower,

Comes a pause in the day’s occupations,

      That is known as the Children’s Hour.

I hear in the chamber above me

      The patter of little feet,

The sound of a door that is opened,

      And voices soft and sweet.

From my study I see in the lamplight,

      Descending the broad hall stair,

Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra,

      And Edith with golden hair.

A whisper, and then a silence:

      Yet I know by their merry eyes

They are plotting and planning together

      To take me by surprise.

A sudden rush from the stairway,

      A sudden raid from the hall!

By three doors left unguarded

      They enter my castle wall!

They climb up into my turret

      O’er the arms and back of my chair;

If I try to escape, they surround me;

      They seem to be everywhere.

They almost devour me with kisses,

      Their arms about me entwine,

Till I think of the Bishop of Bingen

      In his Mouse-Tower on the Rhine!

Do you think, O blue-eyed banditti,

      Because you have scaled the wall,

Such an old mustache as I am

      Is not a match for you all!

I have you fast in my fortress,

      And will not let you depart,

But put you down into the dungeon

      In the round-tower of my heart.

And there will I keep you forever,

      Yes, forever and a day,

Till the walls shall crumble to ruin,

      And moulder in dust away!

Annotations: “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
LineSimple MeaningLiterary Devices
Between the dark and the daylight,The time between evening and nightfall.Imagery, Alliteration (“dark and daylight”)
When the night is beginning to lower,As night begins to fall.Personification (“night lowering”)
Comes a pause in the day’s occupations,There’s a break from daily work.Alliteration (“pause”, “day”)
That is known as the Children’s Hour.This special moment is called the Children’s Hour.Symbolism (represents love/family time)
I hear in the chamber above meHe hears sounds from the room upstairs.Auditory imagery
The patter of little feet,He hears the light footsteps of children.Onomatopoeia (“patter”), Imagery
The sound of a door that is opened,A door opens somewhere above.Auditory imagery
And voices soft and sweet.The children’s voices are gentle and sweet.Alliteration, Auditory imagery
From my study I see in the lamplight,He sees from his study under a lamp’s glow.Visual imagery
Descending the broad hall stair,The children are coming down the stairs.Imagery
Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra,One daughter is serious, another is cheerful.Contrast, Alliteration
And Edith with golden hair.Edith is described as having golden hair.Imagery, Epithet
A whisper, and then a silence:They whisper, then fall silent.Suspense, Auditory imagery
Yet I know by their merry eyesHe sees the mischief in their happy eyes.Personification, Visual imagery
They are plotting and planning togetherThe children are scheming something fun.Alliteration
To take me by surprise.They are planning to surprise him.Suspense
A sudden rush from the stairway,They run down suddenly.Alliteration, Imagery
A sudden raid from the hall!They rush in like raiders.Metaphor (raid), Alliteration
By three doors left unguardedThey sneak in through open doors.Symbolism (unguarded = vulnerability/love)
They enter my castle wall!They break into his “castle”—his study.Metaphor, Hyperbole
They climb up into my turretThey climb onto his chair like a tower.Metaphor
O’er the arms and back of my chair;They clamber over his chair.Archaic language (“O’er”), Imagery
If I try to escape, they surround me;They don’t let him get away.Playful tone, Imagery
They seem to be everywhere.They’re all around him.Hyperbole
They almost devour me with kisses,They smother him with kisses.Hyperbole, Imagery
Their arms about me entwine,They hug him closely.Imagery
Till I think of the Bishop of BingenHe recalls a story about a bishop.Allusion (legend of the Mouse-Tower)
In his Mouse-Tower on the Rhine!A legend of a bishop eaten by mice.Allusion, Historical reference
Do you think, O blue-eyed banditti,He calls the children playful robbers.Metaphor, Apostrophe
Because you have scaled the wall,Because they’ve invaded his “castle.”Metaphor
Such an old mustache as I amHe jokes about being older and clever.Metonymy (“mustache” = man), Humor
Is not a match for you all!He’s pretending they’ve beaten him.Irony, Humor
I have you fast in my fortress,He turns the tables and “captures” them.Reversal, Metaphor
And will not let you depart,He won’t let them go.Hyperbole
But put you down into the dungeonHe’ll keep them locked away in his heart.Metaphor
In the round-tower of my heart.His heart is like a strong tower holding them.Extended metaphor, Symbolism
And there will I keep you forever,He will always keep them close.Hyperbole
Yes, forever and a day,Even longer than forever.Idiom, Hyperbole
Till the walls shall crumble to ruin,Until everything fades away.Imagery, Hyperbole
And moulder in dust away!Until all turns to dust.Alliteration, Finality, Imagery
Literary And Poetic Devices: “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
DeviceDefinitionExample from PoemExplanation
AlliterationRepetition of initial consonant sounds.“Between the dark and the daylight”Creates rhythm and draws attention to the imagery.
AllusionA reference to a person, place, event, or story.“Bishop of Bingen / In his Mouse-Tower on the Rhine!”Refers to a medieval legend, adding depth and historical flavor.
ApostropheAddressing an absent or imaginary person or object.“Do you think, O blue-eyed banditti,”The poet directly addresses his children in a playful way.
Archaic LanguageUse of old-fashioned words or expressions.“O’er the arms and back of my chair;”Adds a classic, fairy-tale tone.
AssonanceRepetition of vowel sounds within words.“voices soft and sweet”Creates musical quality and softness in tone.
ContrastPlacing different elements side-by-side to highlight differences.“Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra”Highlights distinct personalities of the daughters.
Emotive LanguageWords used to evoke emotions.“They almost devour me with kisses”Evokes warmth and affection.
EnjambmentContinuation of a sentence without a pause beyond a line break.“They are plotting and planning together / To take me by surprise.”Maintains flow and builds suspense.
Extended MetaphorA metaphor that continues throughout a series of lines.The castle, fortress, dungeon, and round-tower imageryRepresents the father’s heart and love as a fortified place.
HumorThe quality of being amusing or playful.“Such an old mustache as I am / Is not a match for you all!”Adds a light-hearted, joking tone.
HyperboleDeliberate exaggeration for effect.“They seem to be everywhere.”Emphasizes how overwhelmed he feels by his daughters’ affection.
ImageryDescriptive language that appeals to the senses.“The patter of little feet”Creates a vivid, sensory image of the children.
IronyA contrast between expectation and reality.“I have you fast in my fortress…” (reversing the “attack”)The children “capture” him, yet he “captures” them emotionally.
MetaphorA comparison without using “like” or “as”.“They enter my castle wall!”His study is compared to a castle, symbolizing protection or intimacy.
MetonymySubstitution of a word with something closely related.“Such an old mustache as I am”“Mustache” refers humorously to the speaker himself.
OnomatopoeiaWords that imitate natural sounds.“The patter of little feet”Mimics the sound of children running.
PersonificationGiving human traits to non-human things.“When the night is beginning to lower”Night is described as if it can move and lower.
ReversalA literary twist where roles or expectations flip.Children “invade” his space, then he captures them in his heart.Enhances playfulness and emotional impact.
SymbolismUsing symbols to signify ideas.“Dungeon in the round-tower of my heart.”The heart is symbolized as a secure tower holding love.
ToneThe overall attitude or mood of the speaker.Warm, playful, nostalgicExpresses paternal love and joy in everyday family moments.
Themes: “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

1. “The Children’s Hour” celebrates the deep bond of familial love.
At the heart of the poem lies the affectionate connection between the father and his daughters—Alice, Allegra, and Edith. Longfellow portrays their evening visits as a sacred, almost ritualistic time of joy and tenderness: “They almost devour me with kisses, / Their arms about me entwine.” The metaphor of the children storming his “castle” and being placed in the “round-tower of my heart” expresses how they occupy the most cherished part of his soul. This strong emotional tie is the poem’s foundation, emphasizing that parental love is enduring, warm, and central to the speaker’s life.


2. “The Children’s Hour” highlights the innocence and joy of childhood.
The poem captures a moment of unfiltered playfulness and delight as the children descend the stairs with excitement and energy. They are described vividly: “Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra, / And Edith with golden hair,” showing their individuality and youthful charm. The light footsteps, whispered giggles, and affectionate raid on their father transform a domestic scene into a fairytale of joy and spontaneity. The children’s carefree energy contrasts beautifully with the father’s stillness, emphasizing the freshness and brightness they bring into his life.


3. “The Children’s Hour” explores the idea of time and fleeting moments.
The poem is framed by a specific and transitional time of day—“Between the dark and the daylight”—which represents the fleeting nature of childhood and the brevity of tender moments. This twilight period serves as a metaphor for the brief window in life when children are young and deeply connected to their parents. By naming this time “the Children’s Hour,” Longfellow immortalizes it, suggesting its emotional weight far exceeds its brief duration. The poet’s wish to keep his children “forever and a day” in his heart speaks to the desire to preserve these moments before they vanish with time.


4. “The Children’s Hour” reveals the theme of protection and emotional security.
Though the children playfully attack their father’s “castle,” he reverses the metaphor by claiming them as his prisoners in the “dungeon in the round-tower of my heart.” This image is rich with symbolic meaning: it turns a place of captivity into one of sanctuary and permanence. The speaker wants to shield his daughters not only from harm but also from the passage of time, declaring, “And there will I keep you forever, / Yes, forever and a day.” The fortress becomes a symbol of emotional safety, where love offers both strength and protection.

Literary Theories and “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
Literary TheoryApplication to the PoemReference from PoemExplanation
Psychoanalytic TheoryFocuses on unconscious desires, family bonds, and emotional attachment.“They almost devour me with kisses… / In the round-tower of my heart.”The poem reflects the father’s deep emotional connection and perhaps a subconscious desire to preserve his children’s love and innocence, revealing inner emotional landscapes.
Feminist TheoryExamines the roles and representation of female characters.“Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra, / And Edith with golden hair.”The daughters are portrayed with affection but within traditional, passive roles. A feminist lens may explore how they are idealized and confined to domestic, childlike qualities.
Formalism / New CriticismEmphasizes the poem’s structure, form, and literary devices without outside context.Use of metaphors: “They enter my castle wall!”, alliteration: “soft and sweet”This theory would analyze the poem’s craftsmanship—its imagery, rhyme, metaphor, and tone—as a self-contained work of art.
Reader-Response TheoryHighlights how readers interpret the emotional and imaginative experience.“Till the walls shall crumble to ruin, / And moulder in dust away!”The emotional ending evokes responses of warmth, nostalgia, or melancholy. Reader-response theory values how individual readers connect to the poem’s familial themes.
Critical Questions about “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

1. How does Longfellow’s use of military and fortress imagery in “The Children’s Hour” complicate the portrayal of fatherly love and domestic life?
In “The Children’s Hour”, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow employs military metaphors—such as “a sudden raid from the hall,” and the children scaling his “castle wall”—to depict his daughters’ playful approach. These images traditionally associated with violence and defense are instead transformed into symbols of affection and emotional surrender. This unexpected use of “battle” language within a loving domestic setting reflects the father’s playful vulnerability; he willingly lets down his defenses to allow his daughters to “invade” his space. Moreover, when he “captures” them and keeps them in the “dungeon in the round-tower of [his] heart,” it shifts from mock battle to metaphorical embrace, showing how love redefines traditional masculinity and protection within the family.


2. In what ways does “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow romanticize childhood, and what might be the implications of this idealization?
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “The Children’s Hour” paints childhood with an idealized brush, presenting his daughters as angelic and full of innocent joy. Descriptions like “Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra, / And Edith with golden hair” suggest not only physical beauty but also a moral or emotional purity. The children are further romanticized through fairy-tale imagery—such as their whispered plotting and storming the “castle”—which elevates them to characters in a loving fable. While this creates warmth and nostalgia, it may also oversimplify the complexity of childhood, reducing it to a brief, unchanging state of innocence. This perspective reflects the adult desire to preserve a perfect memory rather than engage with the full reality of growing children.


3. How does the structure and rhythm of “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow enhance its emotional tone and thematic content?
The structure of “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow—short, evenly metered stanzas with regular rhyme—creates a gentle, soothing cadence that mirrors the calm and reflective tone of the poem. This rhythmic pattern helps set the mood of tranquility and affection, especially in the opening lines: “Between the dark and the daylight, / When the night is beginning to lower.” The musical flow reflects the poet’s emotional state—a peaceful pause in the day where love and family take center stage. This rhythm not only enhances the poem’s readability but reinforces the themes of routine, comfort, and cherished moments in the domestic sphere. The steady pace evokes a lullaby-like effect, perfectly aligning with the scene of children nearing bedtime.


4. What role does memory and the desire to preserve moments play in “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and how is this reflected in the poem’s closing lines?
In “The Children’s Hour”, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow explores the tension between the fleeting nature of childhood and a parent’s desire to preserve its joy. The poem begins in the present moment—a peaceful break in the day—but as it progresses, it becomes increasingly nostalgic and reflective. The closing lines—“And there will I keep you forever, / Yes, forever and a day, / Till the walls shall crumble to ruin, / And moulder in dust away!”—transform the scene from playful reality into a timeless emotional vow. The “dungeon in the round-tower” of the speaker’s heart becomes a symbolic sanctuary, where the memory of his daughters will live eternally. Through these metaphors, Longfellow captures the universal longing of parents to hold onto love as time moves forward and children grow.


Literary Works Similar to “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
  1. “Those Winter Sundays” by Robert Hayden
    – Like “The Children’s Hour”, this poem reflects on a father’s quiet, often unnoticed acts of love, emphasizing emotional depth and family bonds.
  2. “My Papa’s Waltz” by Theodore Roethke
    – This poem, similar to “The Children’s Hour”, explores a playful yet intense father-child relationship through physical closeness and shared moments.
  3. “A Child’s Garden” by Rudyard Kipling
    – This poem shares “The Children’s Hour”‘s theme of celebrating childhood wonder, imagination, and the joy children bring to daily life.
  4. “The Toys” by Coventry Patmore
    – Like “The Children’s Hour”, this poem reveals a father’s tenderness and inner emotion, especially in moments of reflection and regret.
Representative Quotations of “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
QuotationContextTheoretical Perspective
“Between the dark and the daylight, / When the night is beginning to lower”Sets a transitional, reflective mood at twilight—the quiet pause before bedtime.Formalism – Highlights structure, mood, and rhythm that establish tone.
“That is known as the Children’s Hour.”Introduces the special time of day devoted to the children.Reader-Response – Evokes warmth and personal nostalgia in the reader.
“I hear in the chamber above me / The patter of little feet”Begins the sensory description of the children’s approach.Psychoanalytic – Connects to the father’s subconscious attachment and attentiveness.
“Grave Alice, and laughing Allegra, / And Edith with golden hair.”Describes the daughters, emphasizing their individual personalities.Feminist – Examines idealized portrayals of girls in traditional domestic roles.
“They are plotting and planning together / To take me by surprise.”Shows the children scheming playfully, strengthening their bond.Narrative Theory – Illustrates character development and plot within the poem.
“They enter my castle wall!”Imagines his study as a fortress being invaded.Metaphorical/Structuralist – Uses extended metaphor to reflect home as safe and meaningful space.
“They almost devour me with kisses”A hyperbolic, affectionate image of the children’s love.Psychoanalytic – Suggests deep emotional fulfillment and vulnerability.
“Do you think, O blue-eyed banditti”Humorously calls the girls bandits, adding playfulness.New Historicist – Reflects 19th-century paternal roles and romanticized childhood.
“Dungeon in the round-tower of my heart.”Symbolizes his heart as a place of emotional captivity.Symbolism – The heart is portrayed as a lasting emotional stronghold.
“Till the walls shall crumble to ruin, / And moulder in dust away!”Expresses his desire to preserve this love even beyond time.Existential/Temporal Theory – Confronts impermanence and human longing to preserve love.
Suggested Readings: “The Children’s Hour” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
  1. Longfellow, Henry Wadsworth. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow: Poems & Other Writings (LOA# 118). Vol. 118. Library of America, 2000.
  2. STREET, ANNIE M. “HENRY WADSWORTH LONGFELLOW.” The Journal of Education, vol. 65, no. 4 (1614), 1907, pp. 91–92. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/42809853. Accessed 25 Mar. 2025.
  3. JONES, ADDISON L. “SUGGESTIVE COURSE IN MEMORY GEMS.” The Journal of Education, vol. 90, no. 13 (2249), 1919, pp. 342–43. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/42800654. Accessed 25 Mar. 2025.
  4. SHERWOOD, ADA SIMPSON. “LONGFELLOW’S DAY.” The Journal of Education, vol. 39, no. 7 (957), 1894, pp. 103–103. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44039363. Accessed 25 Mar. 2025.

“New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang: Summary and Critique

“New Historicism in Rip Van Winkle” by Quan Wang first appeared in The Explicator, Vol. 72, No. 4, 2014 (pp. 320–323), and offers a compelling reinterpretation of Washington Irving’s classic tale through the lens of New Historicist literary theory.

"New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE" by Quan Wang: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang

“New Historicism in Rip Van Winkle” by Quan Wang first appeared in The Explicator, Vol. 72, No. 4, 2014 (pp. 320–323), and offers a compelling reinterpretation of Washington Irving’s classic tale through the lens of New Historicist literary theory. In this article, Wang argues that Rip Van Winkle functions not as a straightforward historical narrative but as a layered, rhetorical construction that transforms subjective fable into objective historical “truth” through discursive authority. Wang draws on New Historicist thought—particularly the idea that history is a textual and rhetorical construct shaped by power and discourse—to analyze how the story gradually gains credibility via multiple narrators: Rip himself, Peter Vanderdonk, Knickerbocker, and Geoffrey Crayon. Each figure lends increasing legitimacy, converting a fantastical personal account into national myth. Referencing theorists like Michel Foucault and Hayden White, Wang underscores that truth in historical storytelling is not determined by factual accuracy but by the authority of the speaker and cultural consensus. Thus, Irving is portrayed as an early New Historicist, blurring the lines between myth and history to create a founding narrative for American identity. The article is important in the realm of literary theory as it not only exemplifies the New Historicist critique of objectivity in historical writing but also repositions Irving’s work within a modern theoretical framework, showing how literature serves to both reflect and construct national consciousness.

Summary of “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang


• History as a Subjective Construct, Not Objective Record
“This article proposes a New Historical reading of Rip Van Winkle: History, instead of being a record of facts, is a subjective construct” (Wang 320).
Wang argues that Irving transforms a fairy tale into historical truth by manipulating narrative structure and authoritative voices, thereby suggesting that what we call “history” is shaped by rhetoric and discourse, not objective reality.

• The Role of Narrators in Creating Historical Authority
“Van Winkle’s experience is told by four figures with different efficacy” (321).
Rip’s initially “incredible” tale becomes accepted as truth through narration by:
Peter Vanderdonk, whose lineage and reputation lend social credibility: “assured the company that it was a fact” (Irving, “Rip” 14).
Knickerbocker, whose scholarly persona and legal references authenticate the tale: “a certificate on the subject taken before a country justice” (16).
Geoffrey Crayon, who frames the story posthumously, imbuing it with detached objectivity.

• Authority over Content: Foucault and Symbolic Legitimacy
“Truth is not determined by the content but by ‘who is speaking under what circumstances’” (Foucault 124, qtd. in Wang 321).
Even when the judge signs with a cross due to illiteracy, the legal stamp still legitimizes the tale: “What matters is symbolic endorsement of law, not individual evaluation of the content” (Wang 321).

• From Local Tale to National Myth
“It is now admitted into all historical collections” (Irving, “Rip” 4).
The story becomes cultural “food,” both literally (on new-year cakes) and symbolically, forming part of America’s historical identity.

• Posthumous Framing and the Illusion of Objectivity
“Crayon, as an ex-contemporary, is retrospectively reconstructing the story from ‘historicality’” (Wang 322).
Crayon’s narration appears more “objective” due to its posthumous stance, reinforcing the transformation of fiction into official history through narrative distance and intertextual references.

• Irving’s Other Works Support the Constructed Nature of History
“History fades into fable, fact becomes clouded with doubt and controversy” (Sketch Book 903).
Irving’s A History of New York illustrates how revisions were driven not by new facts but by exploiting “rhetorical possibilities” (McGann 350), reinforcing the view that history is narratively and ideologically constructed.

• Historical Writing as Rhetoric, Not Science
“Historical writing in the eighteenth century ‘was regarded as a branch of the art of rhetoric’” (White 64, qtd. in Wang 323).
New Historicism revives this earlier view, challenging the idea of history as an objective discipline and returning to a rhetorical and literary understanding of past events.

• Change in Signifiers, Not Real Change
“The sign of King George is metamorphosed into that of General Washington” (Wang 323).
For Rip, the American Revolution had little personal impact. The supposed progress is only symbolic, a shift in signs rather than substance—highlighting Irving’s skepticism about the myth of linear historical progress.

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang

Term/ConceptDefinitionContext in the Article
New HistoricismA literary theory that views history as a construct shaped by power, discourse, and cultural context.Central framework; Wang reads Rip Van Winkle as a narrative that shows history is “a subjective construct” (Wang 320).
HistoricalityThe quality of being historical; how events are retrospectively reconstructed into coherent narratives.Used to describe Geoffrey Crayon’s role in turning Rip’s tale into “historical truth” from a posthumous perspective (Wang 322).
Rhetorical PossibilitiesThe capacity of language and narrative to shape perception and meaning.Seen in Irving’s revisions of A History of New York, which were not based on new facts but on “rhetorical possibilities” (McGann 350).
Symbolic AuthorityAuthority derived from symbols of power (law, scholarship) rather than content truth.The “certificate” signed with a cross still grants truth to Rip’s tale due to its symbolic legal power (Wang 321).
IntertextualityThe relationship between texts and how one text shapes the meaning of another.Peter Vanderdonk’s validation of Rip’s tale draws on the established legend of Hudson, showing “intertextual consistency” (Wang 321).
Paper AuthorityThe notion that written, official-looking documents are trusted regardless of their accuracy.Kirk Curnutt’s idea that people trust “paper authority” blindly, reinforcing Wang’s argument about symbolic legitimacy (Wang 321).
Configuration (of events)Hayden White’s idea that historical meaning comes from how events are plotted narratively.Wang uses this to argue that Irving creates meaning through plot structure, not through historical facts (Wang 322).
Within-time-nessEvents narrated within their own temporal context, as opposed to a detached historical perspective.Applied to Rip, Peter, and Knickerbocker, whose narratives are situated within the timeline of the story (Wang 322).
Posthumous WritingNarration presented after the fact or death, lending objectivity and narrative distance.Geoffrey Crayon’s role is described as a “posthumous” narrator who frames the tale as a credible historical account (Wang 322).
Contribution of “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang to Literary Theory/Theories


🔹 1. Contribution to New Historicism
Redefining Historical Truth as Discursively Constructed
Wang shows that Irving transforms a “marvellous” tale into a historically accepted narrative not through factual content, but through authoritative discourse.
“This article proposes a New Historical reading of ‘Rip Van Winkle’: History, instead of being a record of facts, is a subjective construct” (Wang 320).
Illustrates the Power of Narrative Authority
Figures like Peter Vanderdonk, Knickerbocker, and Crayon shape the public’s perception of Rip’s tale as historical reality.
“Truth is not determined by the content but by ‘who is speaking under what circumstances’” (Foucault 124, qtd. in Wang 321).

🔹 2. Contribution to Rhetorical Theory and Hayden White’s Historiography
Narrative Plot Over Factual Accuracy
Wang draws on Hayden White to argue that the significance of events lies in how they are “configured” through narrative.
“The significance of an event could be revealed only in ‘the configuration of them [events] through the instrumentality of plot’” (White 51, qtd. in Wang 322).
Posthumous Framing and the Illusion of Objectivity
Geoffrey Crayon’s role as narrator distances the tale from subjective memory and adds historical gravitas.
“Crayon, as an ex-contemporary, is retrospectively reconstructing the story from ‘historicality’” (Wang 322).

🔹 3. Contribution to Foucault’s Discourse and Power
Symbolic Authority Overrides Truth
The villagers’ acceptance of Rip’s story is driven by institutional symbols (e.g., legal certificates), not logic.
“What matters is symbolic endorsement of law, not individual evaluation of the content” (Wang 321).
Blind Trust in Institutionalized Knowledge
Wang highlights society’s faith in legal and scholarly authority even when those institutions may lack substance.
Kirk Curnutt describes it as “people’s blind faith in ‘paper authority’” (Curnutt 32, qtd. in Wang 321).

🔹 4. Contribution to the Study of National Identity and Myth-Making
Transformation of Fiction into Founding Myth
Irving’s tale becomes part of America’s national historical narrative, functioning as a cultural myth.
“It is now admitted into all historical collections” and his image is on “new-year cakes” (Irving, “Rip” 4; Wang 321).
National Progress as Rhetorical Illusion
The shift from King George to General Washington is a symbolic change without real transformation in Rip’s life.
“The change of signifiers is to flatter our imagination that we have made progress” (Wang 323).

🔹 5. Contribution to Meta-History and Historiography
Irving’s History as Literary Performance
Through A History of New York, Wang reveals Irving’s awareness of history as rhetorical play, not factual documentation.
“Irving’s exploitation of ‘rhetorical possibilities’” in revisions indicates the malleability of history (McGann 350, qtd. in Wang 322).
History as Cyclical, Not Linear
By referencing Kant’s contradictory historical conclusions, Wang emphasizes the imagined nature of progress.
“Historical progress exists only in our imagination” (Wang 323).

Examples of Critiques Through “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang
Literary WorkApplication of Wang’s New HistoricismInsight Gained
Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet LetterLike Irving’s use of authoritative narrators, Hawthorne’s Custom House narrator frames Hester’s tale as a recovered artifact, creating an illusion of historic truth through legal and moral authority.Truth is socially validated and institutionalized rather than inherently factual.
Toni Morrison’s BelovedThe ghost story element mirrors Rip’s “incredible” tale, gaining legitimacy through collective memory and oral history. Authority comes from communal trauma and generational testimony.History emerges from marginalized voices and emotional truth rather than written record.
George Orwell’s 1984Like Rip’s tale becoming official history, Orwell’s Ministry of Truth rewrites past events to fit the present narrative. Authority, not factuality, dictates public belief.Power structures fabricate history to control identity and memory.
Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall ApartThe clash between Igbo oral tradition and European written history echoes Wang’s idea of multiple narrative authorities shaping history. Colonial archives mirror Crayon’s role in legitimizing one view.Historical truth is constructed through conflict between indigenous voices and colonial authority.
Criticism Against “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang


🔸 Overemphasis on Discourse, Neglect of Material History
Wang focuses heavily on discursive authority and symbolic legitimization but offers little analysis of the material, economic, or political conditions of early America.
The article may appear detached from historical specificity, treating history as a purely textual phenomenon.

🔸 Reliance on Authority Figures May Reinforce Elitism
While Wang critiques symbolic authority (e.g., Peter Vanderdonk, Knickerbocker), he also accepts their role in shaping “truth”, potentially reinforcing the power of elite narrators without questioning deeper power dynamics.

🔸 Lack of Engagement with Marginalized Voices
The article does not consider whose histories are silenced in the process of Rip’s story becoming “historical truth.”
A feminist or postcolonial perspective might critique Wang for failing to address gender, race, or class in the construction of national myth.

🔸 Ambiguity Between Authorial Intent and Theoretical Reading
Wang blurs the line between Irving’s literary technique and New Historicist ideology, sometimes treating Irving as if he were consciously theorizing history, which may be an anachronistic projection.

🔸 Potential Circular Reasoning in Legitimization
The argument that Rip’s story becomes historical because authoritative figures validate it, and that authority is credible because it validates the story, risks circular logic.

🔸 Neglect of Reader’s Role in Meaning-Making
Wang centers narrative authority and textual framing but overlooks reader reception and the role of audience interpretation in constructing historical meaning.

🔸 Minimal Contrast with Other Theories
The article could benefit from clearer distinctions or dialogue with competing literary theories (e.g., structuralism, postmodernism, or Marxism), which would strengthen its theoretical position.

 Representative Quotations from “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang with Explanation

1. “History, instead of being a record of facts, is a subjective construct.” (Wang 320)
Central thesis: History is shaped by discourse, not objective truth.
2. “Rip Van Winkle’s experience is an ‘incredible’ story but finally becomes historical reality with ‘unquestionable authority.’” (Irving, “Rip” 4)
The tale’s transformation from fantasy to accepted history illustrates how social belief and narrative framing define truth.
3. “Truth is not determined by the content but by ‘who is speaking under what circumstances.’” (Foucault 124)
Authority of the speaker matters more than the verifiability of the content—key New Historicist idea.
4. “Peter’s social prestige reduces their suspicion and adds much authority to Rip’s story.” (Wang 321)
Social status acts as a tool for legitimizing narratives and shaping public belief.
5. “The certificate from a legal authority suggests official recognition of Van Winkle’s story.” (Wang 321)
Institutional backing lends legitimacy, regardless of truth—history becomes an institutional product.
6. “Crayon… is retrospectively reconstructing the story from ‘historicality.’” (Wang 322)
Geoffrey Crayon’s role exemplifies posthumous narrative distance, giving the tale an illusion of detached objectivity.
7. “History fades into fable, fact becomes clouded with doubt and controversy.” (The Sketch Book 903)
Irving acknowledges history’s tendency to dissolve into myth—reinforcing the cyclical relationship between fiction and history.
8. “Irving’s exploitation of ‘rhetorical possibilities.’” (McGann 350, qtd. in Wang 322)
Irving reshaped his texts not due to new facts but for rhetorical effect, showing awareness of narrative power.
9. “The significance of an event could be revealed only in ‘the configuration of them [events] through the instrumentality of plot.’” (White 51)
History is a literary structure: events gain meaning through how they’re told, not through their factual existence.
10. “The change of signifiers is to flatter our imagination that we have made progress.” (Wang 323)
American independence is symbolically encoded (e.g., King George to General Washington) but does not reflect genuine societal transformation for Rip.

Suggested Readings: “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE” by Quan Wang
  • Wang, Quan. “New Historicism in RIP VAN WINKLE.” The Explicator 72.4 (2014): 320-323.
  • Parvini, Neema. “New Historicism.” Shakespeare’s History Plays: Rethinking Historicism, Edinburgh University Press, 2012, pp. 10–32. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1wf4c98.6. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  • Hoover, Dwight W. “The New Historicism.” The History Teacher, vol. 25, no. 3, 1992, pp. 355–66. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/494247. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  • FRY, PAUL H. “The New Historicism.” Theory of Literature, Yale University Press, 2012, pp. 246–58. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npkg4.22. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  • Veenstra, Jan R. “The New Historicism of Stephen Greenblatt: On Poetics of Culture and the Interpretation of Shakespeare.” History and Theory, vol. 34, no. 3, 1995, pp. 174–98. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2505620. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.

“Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern: Summary and Critique

“Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern first appeared in New Literary History, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Spring 1990), a special issue titled New Historicisms, New Histories, and Others, published by the Johns Hopkins University Press.

"Narrative versus Description in Historiography" by Laurent Stern: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern

“Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern first appeared in New Literary History, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Spring 1990), a special issue titled New Historicisms, New Histories, and Others, published by the Johns Hopkins University Press. In this influential article, Stern explores the epistemological divide between narrative and description within historical writing, arguing that while descriptions can account for observable circumstances, only narratives can render intelligible the purposeful actions of historical agents. He critiques the assumption that historical accounts can rely solely on neutral descriptions, asserting instead that interpretations—rooted in the attribution of beliefs, desires, and intentions—are essential for understanding non-natural events. Stern’s analysis is significant in literary theory and historiography because it underscores the role of narrative as a constitutive, not merely representational, element of historical knowledge. Drawing on examples such as St. Bartholomew’s Massacre and Caesar’s crossing of the Rubicon, Stern emphasizes that narratives are not reducible to rhetorical flourishes but are epistemically indispensable, as they structure our understanding of past events through imaginative yet evidence-bound reconstructions. His work contributes meaningfully to debates around objectivity, interpretation, and the narrative turn in the humanities.

Summary of “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern
  • Distinction Between Natural and Non-Natural Events:
    • Historians must use narrative to distinguish between natural disasters and public events like wars or revolutions, which require understanding of intention and purpose (p. 555).
    • “If historical accounts are limited to descriptions of observable events, historians cannot succeed in telling us how non-natural events happened” (p. 555).
  • Interpretation vs. Explanation:
    • Historians interpret what happened (what-questions) and explain why it happened (why-questions), but often the distinction is blurred in practice (p. 555–556).
    • Interpretations are “confirmed by what [historians] do in exercising their craft” (p. 555).
  • Narratives as Interpretations:
    • Assigning beliefs, desires, and intentions to historical agents is inherently interpretative. Competing narratives show the provisional nature of these interpretations (p. 556).
    • “Our story becomes merely an interpretation as soon as it is defeated by a competing story” (p. 556).
  • Evaluative and Descriptive Significance in Narratives:
    • Narratives confer both evaluative and descriptive significance to events; for example, the Battle of Lepanto requires narrative to give it historical meaning (p. 557).
  • Limitations of Descriptions:
    • Descriptions can only account for observable circumstances, not the internal experiences or motivations of historical agents (p. 561).
    • “Descriptions need not have a point. They merely tell us about what a witness has observed” (p. 561).
  • Narratives Provide Meaning and Understanding:
    • Narratives allow historians to make sense of actions by reconstructing intentions and goals based on available evidence and reasonable projection (p. 562).
    • “Narratives about human actions have a point… what agents did, and what they brought about” (p. 561).
  • Historiography and Perspective:
    • All narratives are constructed from a narrator’s viewpoint; there is no “definitive” narrative outside interpretive frames (p. 564).
    • The case of St. Bartholomew’s Massacre exemplifies how narratives change over time based on new evidence and evolving standards of judgment (p. 563–564).
  • Events vs. Accounts of Events:
    • Events (res gestae) are distinct from their historical representations (historia rerum gestarum). Our understanding changes, not the events themselves (p. 562).
  • Role of the Historian:
    • Historians talk for past agents who cannot speak for themselves. Even firsthand accounts are subject to later reinterpretation and correction (p. 560).
    • “Only historical accounts talk for experiences and human actions; experiences and actions cannot talk for themselves” (p. 560–561).
  • Mutability of Historical Understanding:
    • Interpretations shift over time; understanding of past events is inherently provisional and dependent on the present context and knowledge (p. 565–566).
  • Descriptions and Narratives Must Complement Each Other:
    • “Narratives that are not supported by descriptions are vacuous; descriptions that do not lead to narratives are pointless” (p. 567).
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern
Term/ConceptDefinition/Explanation
NarrativeA structured account of events that conveys meaning by interpreting agents’ actions, intentions, and outcomes; essential for understanding non-natural events.
DescriptionA factual, observational account of what occurred, focusing only on what is visible or measurable, without inferring motives or intentions.
InterpretationThe process of assigning meaning to events by ascribing beliefs, desires, and purposes to historical agents; foundational to narrative historiography.
ExplanationA causal account of why events occurred, often overlapping with interpretation; concerned with reasoning rather than mere recounting.
Res gestae vs. Historia rerum gestarumLatin terms distinguishing actual events (res gestae) from the narrative or history written about them (historia rerum gestarum).
Evaluative SignificanceThe importance of an event as judged over time based on its effects or consequences, often determined retrospectively.
Descriptive SignificanceThe significance of an event in terms of what actually happened, based on observable details.
Imaginative ReconstructionA method historians use to infer the beliefs and desires of historical agents by creatively projecting plausible motives from available evidence.
Viewpoint / StandpointThe perspective or position from which a historian constructs a narrative, influencing both interpretation and evaluation.
Defeated InterpretationAn interpretation that is replaced or rendered obsolete by a more convincing or evidence-based competing account.
Principle of CharityA hermeneutic approach assuming that past agents were rational and that their beliefs were reasonable from their own context, enabling historical understanding.
Historical UnderstandingThe process of making sense of past human actions through narratives that integrate interpretation and evidence.
Non-natural EventsEvents caused by human action and intention, such as wars or revolutions, which require interpretation and cannot be explained by description alone.
Observable EventsEvents that can be empirically verified through direct observation, such as natural phenomena or demographic data.
Contribution of “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern to Literary Theory/Theories
  • Narrative Theory:
    • Stern highlights that narrative is not a stylistic choice but a necessary epistemological form in historiography: “Narratives about human actions have a point… what agents did, and what they brought about” (p. 561).
    • He aligns with key insights from narrative theory that interpretation is embedded in any account of events, reinforcing that “events that occurred (res gestae) must not be confused with our account about them (historia rerum gestarum)” (p. 562).
    • Challenges distinctions in narrative theory (fabula/sjuzhet, histoire/récit) as being non-essential in historical writing (p. 563).
  • Hermeneutics and Interpretation Theory:
    • Contributes to philosophical hermeneutics by asserting that interpretation is intrinsic to historical narration: “Interpretation… becomes an object of interpretation only after it has been produced by interpreting” (p. 562).
    • Introduces the idea that understanding history relies on the principle of charity—interpreting past agents as rational actors (p. 566), echoing the hermeneutic approach of Vico and Davidson.
  • New Historicism:
    • Anticipates and supports key New Historicist concerns by emphasizing the constructed nature of historical narratives and their dependence on contemporary viewpoints: “There may be narratives about historical events that are definitive from our viewpoint, but there cannot be a definitive narrative that is independent of a given viewpoint” (p. 567).
    • Demonstrates how interpretation shapes understanding of events like the St. Bartholomew’s Massacre, and how dominant narratives change over time, reflecting shifting cultural perspectives (p. 563–564).
  • Reader-Response Theory (Indirect Influence):
    • Though not directly discussed, the emphasis on the historian’s (narrator’s) viewpoint and imaginative reconstruction suggests a parallel with the reader’s active role in constructing meaning (p. 564–565).
    • The idea that narratives vary based on who constructs them resonates with reader-response emphasis on interpretation variability.
  • Structuralism/Post-Structuralism:
    • Challenges structuralist assumptions of stable meaning by showing how the same event (e.g., the assassination of a politician) can be constructed as multiple, incompatible narratives (p. 565).
    • Indicates a post-structuralist awareness that “not all interpretations are merely interpretations,” though they remain subject to contestation (p. 556).
Examples of Critiques Through “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern
Literary WorkCritique Through Stern’s Framework
Virginia Woolf’s To the LighthouseWoolf’s stream-of-consciousness style highlights subjective experience and internal perspectives, aligning with Stern’s view that narratives interpret beliefs and desires (p. 562).
William Faulkner’s Absalom, Absalom!Faulkner’s multi-perspective structure exemplifies Stern’s notion of competing narratives. The novel demonstrates how historical understanding is shaped by varying interpretations (pp. 563–564).
Toni Morrison’s BelovedMorrison reconstructs lost or silenced histories, echoing Stern’s claim that only narratives can speak for human experiences and intentions, which cannot be captured by description alone (p. 560).
George Orwell’s 1984Orwell’s depiction of history manipulated by ideology reflects Stern’s critique of interpretive dominance. Accepted narratives are upheld until challenged by competing interpretations (p. 556).
Criticism Against “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern

  • Overemphasis on Interpretation at the Expense of Objectivity:
    • Critics may argue that Stern downplays the value of empirical, descriptive history, potentially undermining the historian’s responsibility to represent facts with accuracy and neutrality.
  • Insufficient Engagement with Structuralist and Post-Structuralist Theories:
    • While Stern briefly mentions literary distinctions like fabula and sjuzhet, he dismisses their importance in historical writing without fully addressing their theoretical significance (p. 563).
  • Ambiguity in Defining “Defeated” Interpretations:
    • The idea that interpretations are “defeated” by others remains vague. Critics may question the criteria or authority by which one narrative becomes more valid than another (p. 556).
  • Underestimation of Non-Narrative Forms of Knowledge:
    • Stern’s claim that descriptions without narratives are “pointless” (p. 567) may be seen as dismissive of quantitative, archival, or materialist methodologies that are crucial to historical analysis.
  • Risk of Relativism:
    • By asserting that there is no definitive narrative outside a given viewpoint (p. 567), Stern may open the door to relativism, where all historical accounts are equally valid or invalid.
  • Neglect of Power Dynamics in Narrative Construction:
    • Unlike Foucauldian or New Historicist approaches, Stern does not fully explore how power, ideology, and institutional authority shape which narratives prevail in historiography.
  • Limited Discussion of Non-Western Epistemologies:
    • The argument is grounded in Western philosophical traditions and may not adequately consider alternative ways of knowing or narrating history in non-Western cultures.
Representative Quotations from “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern with Explanation
QuotationExplanation
“If historical accounts are limited to descriptions of observable events, historians cannot succeed in telling us how non-natural events happened.” (p. 555)Stern asserts that purely descriptive methods are inadequate for explaining complex human actions, which require narrative to explore motives and contexts.
“Accounts of non-natural events tell us what a purposeful agent did or brought about.” (p. 556)Emphasizes that historical narratives must involve intentional agents, requiring the reconstruction of actions within a narrative frame.
“Narratives are indispensable in historiography.” (p. 557)Declares that storytelling is not optional but essential for understanding and representing human history.
“Descriptions… merely tell us about what a witness has observed.” (p. 561)Differentiates descriptions from narratives by underscoring their observational and limited nature.
“Narratives about human actions have a point.” (p. 561)Highlights that narratives aim to explain causes, intentions, and consequences—unlike detached descriptions.
“The beliefs and desires ascribed to an agent are products of an interpreting activity.” (p. 562)Argues that understanding agents’ motives is a result of interpretive storytelling, not empirical observation.
“Talk about past events is dependent on our understanding of these events.” (p. 562)Suggests that historical knowledge is shaped by evolving interpretations, not static facts.
“Only historical accounts talk for experiences and human actions; experiences and actions cannot talk for themselves.” (p. 560)Asserts that history gives voice to the past through narration, which transforms silent experiences into comprehensible accounts.
“Not all interpretations are merely interpretations.” (p. 556)Counters relativism by arguing that some interpretations are more valid due to stronger evidential support.
“Narratives that are not supported by descriptions are vacuous; descriptions that do not lead to narratives are pointless.” (p. 568)Concludes that historical understanding must integrate both descriptive grounding and narrative meaning.
Suggested Readings: “Narrative versus Description in Historiography” by Laurent Stern
  1. Stern, Laurent. “Narrative versus description in historiography.” New literary history 21.3 (1990): 555-568.
  2. Ronen, Ruth. “Description, Narrative and Representation.” Narrative, vol. 5, no. 3, 1997, pp. 274–86. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20107124. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  3. Stern, Laurent. “Narrative versus Description in Historiography.” New Literary History, vol. 21, no. 3, 1990, pp. 555–68. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/469125. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.

“The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan: Summary and Critique

“The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan first appeared in the New Literary History journal in the Spring of 1990 (Vol. 21, No. 3), published by The Johns Hopkins University Press.

"The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism" by Richard Lehan: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan

“The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan first appeared in the New Literary History journal in the Spring of 1990 (Vol. 21, No. 3), published by The Johns Hopkins University Press. In this seminal article, Lehan critiques the foundational assumptions of the New Historicism, particularly its reliance on synchronic or spatialized conceptions of time at the expense of diachronic, process-oriented understandings of history. Drawing from thinkers like Foucault and Derrida, Lehan argues that New Historicism, while claiming to eschew grand narratives, paradoxically imposes paradigmatic constructs that suppress temporal progression and ideological development. He emphasizes the political and ideological implications embedded in literary forms, advocating for a renewed engagement with historical process and narrative temporality. Lehan’s essay is crucial to literary theory for exposing the methodological limitations of New Historicism and for urging a return to historicized readings that account for cultural, political, and temporal dynamics in literature.

Summary of “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan

● The Incoherence of New Historicism as a Methodology

Lehan criticizes the New Historicism for lacking an overarching methodological framework. Instead of presenting a unified system of interpretation, it delivers “a series of discrete and diverse readings of literary texts and cultural periods as if these readings were bound by doctrine” (Lehan 536). This absence of methodological unity, according to Lehan, weakens its credibility as a legitimate critical school, particularly in contrast to the more structured approaches of structuralism and Marxism.


● Suppression of Historical Process Through the Synchronic Turn

Lehan’s primary critique centers on New Historicism’s substitution of spatial (synchronic) for temporal (diachronic) readings of history. He sees this as part of a broader postmodern trend that erases the notion of historical continuity. He warns against the “dangers of spatializing time” (Lehan 533) and critiques how synchronic methods “create a disjunction between what the text is saying about history and what the historian is saying about the text” (Lehan 536). This disjunction leads to a flattening of temporality and a loss of historical agency.


● The Shift from Causality to Representation Undermines History

The New Historicism’s Foucauldian roots encourage a retreat from linear, causal history toward representational paradigms. As Lehan observes, in this view, “we do not ‘know’ history but only the paradigms that we bring to the explanation of what we call history” (Lehan 535). By emphasizing tropes, signs, and representations, this approach transforms both history and literature into self-referential systems, severing them from real-world causality and change.


● Postmodern Denial of Historical Meaning as Ideological Erasure

Lehan argues that New Historicism and its theoretical allies—especially Foucault, Derrida, and de Man—engage in a covert ideological act by denying the possibility of historical direction or progress. This denial, ironically, constitutes an ideological position: “no theory of history—or of literary criticism—is neutral but carries within it an ideology” (Lehan 536). The idea that “history has no direction even as it takes the idea of direction as its object of attack” is, for Lehan, a self-contradiction (Lehan 536).


● Structuralist and Poststructuralist Denials of History Are Paradoxically Historicized

Even while denying historical continuity, structuralists and poststructuralists cannot escape historical influence. Lehan contends that “semiotics, for example, depends totally on reading signs in a historical/cultural context” (Lehan 536). He illustrates this with the example of how a burning American flag held radically different meanings before and after the Vietnam War. Thus, any claim to historical neutrality is inherently flawed and historically contingent.


● Derrida and De Man: Freezing Narrative Time into Rhetorical Suspension

Lehan critiques Derrida’s deconstruction of time and meaning as leading to a state of “thought without action” and a suspension of historical agency (Lehan 538). He similarly faults de Man for reducing narrative texts to isolated rhetorical moments: “flux is frozen static by a preoccupation with rhetorical forms of play” (Lehan 539). Both thinkers, in Lehan’s view, sever language from temporality, turning historical and narrative process into inert tropes.


● The Collapse of History into Tropes Leads to Ethical and Political Abdication

According to Lehan, by eliminating time and causality, the New Historicism eliminates the basis for ethical responsibility and political engagement. He asserts, “in denying history, we affirm it, because our denial can never be separated from a historical context” (Lehan 536). The aestheticization of history removes any real-world implications, thereby neutralizing the potential for critique or resistance.


● Case Study: Tropological Misreading of Sister Carrie

Lehan critiques Walter Benn Michaels’s The Gold Standard and the Logic of Naturalism as a representative New Historicist reading that subordinates narrative structure to trope. Michaels interprets Sister Carrie through the lens of money and desire, portraying Carrie as a metaphor for capitalist subjectivity. Lehan challenges this view, arguing that “Carrie’s sense of desire is stimulated first by Chicago… and then by New York” (Lehan 542), indicating an environmental and evolutionary logic rather than a purely tropological one. Michaels, Lehan argues, represses Dreiser’s naturalistic causal sequences, particularly the contrasting trajectories of Carrie and Hurstwood.


● The Ethical Importance of Narrative Sequence and Causality

Lehan insists that time is not reducible to language, and that narrative temporality must be recovered to understand a text’s ethical and political implications. “Time is not language, and language is not time. We can speak about time in language, but this is not identical with the way we experience time” (Lehan 545). He argues that abandoning diachronic narrative in favor of synchronic representation leads to the depoliticization of literature.


● Literary Subgenres as Expressions of Historical Change

Lehan promotes the reading of literary subgenres as historically embedded forms that reflect cultural shifts. He explores how genres like the Gothic, Western, detective novel, and the young-man-from-the-provinces story evolved from specific historical contexts. For example, the Gothic novel encodes anxieties over the decline of the landed estate, while the detective novel arises alongside the growth of the modern city and concerns over urban anonymity (Lehan 546–49).


● Intertextuality as Historicized Dialogue

Lehan redefines intertextuality in historical terms, showing how texts speak to each other across historical moments. Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, for instance, inverts the idealism of the Western genre to critique capitalist modernity. “Fitzgerald brilliantly showed how romantic expectation was connected with historical ideals always located in the past” (Lehan 544). Intertextual allusions thus reflect transformations in cultural values, not just rhetorical play.


● Reinstating Historical Process in Literary Studies

In his conclusion, Lehan argues for a return to literary analysis rooted in historical process rather than representational tropes. He calls for recognition of historical transitions—e.g., from feudalism to capitalism, or from industrial to informational economies—and their reflections in literature. He links naturalism and modernism as responses to the same industrial age, noting that “modernism and naturalism are thus two different responses to the same historical moment” (Lehan 553).


Final Assessment

Lehan’s essay is both a sustained critique of the theoretical underpinnings of the New Historicism and a proposal for restoring historical temporality, causality, and ideological engagement to literary criticism. He insists that narrative and historical process matter—not just as thematic content but as ideological form. He urges critics to “restore process to our use of history” (Lehan 533), anchoring literary study once again in the dynamic interplay between form, temporality, and political culture.

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan
Term/ConceptMeaningUsage in the Article
New HistoricismA literary theory that emphasizes the cultural, social, and political contexts of texts, often using historical documents alongside literary works.Criticized by Lehan for lacking a unified methodology and for collapsing historical sequence into tropological readings of texts.
Synchronic TimeTime viewed as static and spatial, focusing on structures and paradigms rather than historical sequence.Critiqued for replacing narrative flow and causality with static representations, leading to a loss of historical process and political meaning.
Diachronic TimeTime understood as linear, causal, and unfolding—emphasizing sequence and historical change.Advocated by Lehan as essential for understanding literary narratives and their political and historical dimensions.
RepresentationThe act of depicting or interpreting reality through rhetorical or symbolic forms, often emphasizing language over material context.Seen as a dominant approach in New Historicism that flattens history into rhetorical tropes, thereby aestheticizing and depoliticizing texts.
ParadigmA conceptual framework or model used to interpret historical and cultural data, often seen as replacing linear narratives.Used to describe Foucault’s “epistemes” which, Lehan argues, deny continuity and process by treating history as a series of disconnected conceptual shifts.
Tropological ReadingAn interpretive method that focuses on figurative language, symbols, and rhetorical devices in texts.Criticized by Lehan for reducing complex historical narratives to isolated metaphors or signs, thereby ignoring time and causality.
EpistemeFoucault’s term for an overarching knowledge structure that defines the conditions of thought in a given era.Questioned by Lehan for suggesting abrupt historical ruptures and lacking explanation for transitions between paradigms.
IdeologyA system of ideas that shapes cultural, social, or political beliefs, often unconsciously embedded in narratives and historical accounts.Lehan argues that ideology is inherent in concepts of time and representation and that postmodern critics often displace ideology while inadvertently reaffirming it.
Contribution of “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Critique of New Historicism

  • Identifies methodological incoherence: Lehan argues that New Historicism lacks a unifying methodology, offering “a series of discrete and diverse readings” rather than a coherent theoretical framework (p. 536).
  • Challenges synchronic bias: He criticizes New Historicism’s tendency to favor synchronic (spatial) readings, which freeze historical narrative and suppress diachronic (temporal) movement (p. 538).
  • Warns against aestheticizing history: Lehan asserts that turning history into tropes or representations, as in the Berkeley school, robs texts of political agency and historical process (pp. 540–541).

2. Contribution to Historicism and Diachronic Literary Analysis

  • Reasserts process and narrative in history: Lehan calls for restoring diachronic time to literary criticism, arguing that history involves “a flow of time” that representation-based theories often ignore (p. 535).
  • Links ideology to temporality: He posits that how we conceptualize time reflects ideological commitments, even when denied (p. 536).
  • Advocates historical reading of genres: Through examples like Sister Carrie, The Great Gatsby, and gothic novels, he shows how subgenres are tied to historical shifts, rejecting the ahistorical flattening of textual meaning (pp. 541–547).

3. Response to Structuralism and Poststructuralism

  • Critiques structuralist universalism: Lehan finds Levi-Strauss’s belief in universal mental structures as undermining historical difference, making time and culture redundant (p. 537).
  • Challenges Derridean suspension: He argues that Derrida’s concept of deferral and deconstruction leads to a denial of agency and ethical time, resulting in a “world robbed of process and agency” (p. 538).
  • Demystifies de Man’s rhetoric: Lehan critiques de Man for collapsing narrative meaning by focusing on isolated rhetorical moments, thereby repressing historical and political context (p. 539).

4. Engagement with Marxist and Materialist Theory

  • Emphasizes historical materialism: Through critique of works like Walter Benn Michaels’ The Gold Standard and the Logic of Naturalism, Lehan exposes how tropological readings ignore economic and material determinants (pp. 540–543).
  • Connects literary forms to socio-economic shifts: He traces the emergence of genres (e.g., detective fiction, Western, naturalist novel) to transitions such as urbanization, capitalism, and empire, aligning with a Marxist view of base-superstructure (pp. 546–550).

5. Revisions to Periodization and Literary History

  • Replaces static periods with historical process: Lehan suggests abandoning rigid literary period labels in favor of understanding “literary naturalism” and “modernism” as responses to the same socio-economic realities (p. 552).
  • Intertextuality as historicized dialogue: He reframes intertextuality not as infinite textual play but as historically situated dialogues among writers and movements (p. 551).
Examples of Critiques Through “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan
Literary WorkTheoretical Framework from LehanExplanation of the Critique
Sister Carrie by Theodore DreiserCritique of Representational Tropes; Defense of Narrative Causality and Diachronic TimeLehan challenges Walter Benn Michaels’ reading that reduces Sister Carrie to a trope of capitalist desire. He argues that this suppresses Dreiser’s naturalistic structure, which depends on cause and effect and environmental determinism. The novel’s temporal sequence and ideological critique are essential.
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott FitzgeraldTemporal Process and Historical Unfolding; Opposition to Rhetorical SuspensionLehan resists poststructuralist interpretations that freeze Gatsby at the level of language and metaphor. He emphasizes the novel’s narrative flow and historical critique of American romantic ideals, capitalist decay, and urban alienation through diachronic storytelling.
The Waste Land by T. S. EliotCyclical Historical Time; Critique of Spatialization of Temporal EventsLehan interprets Eliot’s “falling towers” motif as part of a cyclical view of history, showing imperial decline. He argues that reading Eliot purely in synchronic terms (as some new historicists do) misses the poem’s embedded historical consciousness and critique of cultural entropy.
The Virginian by Owen Wister and Shane by Jack SchaeferHistoricized Subgenre Analysis; Western as Cultural Encoding of Social and Class TransitionLehan treats the Western as a historically determined subgenre. He shows how both novels reflect changing attitudes toward land, masculinity, and class—embodying ideologies of frontier conquest, natural aristocracy, and American exceptionalism. These texts mirror historical changes in national identity.
Criticism Against “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan
  • Overgeneralization of Postmodern Thinkers:
    Lehan tends to group together disparate figures such as Foucault, Derrida, and de Man under a single critical lens, potentially oversimplifying their distinct methodologies and philosophical nuances.
  • Excessive Nostalgia for Diachronic Models:
    His strong preference for diachronic history and narrative progression may seem nostalgic or conservative, potentially neglecting the productive insights offered by synchronic or spatial approaches to cultural texts.
  • Limited Engagement with Diversity in New Historicism:
    Lehan critiques the “representation school” primarily based on examples like Walter Benn Michaels and Foucault, but this does not fully represent the variety of practices and innovations within the New Historicist movement.
  • Underestimation of Tropological Critique:
    While he warns against reducing historical texts to tropes, some may argue that Lehan underestimates the critical power of tropological and rhetorical analysis to uncover ideology and contradiction in historical discourse.
  • Insufficient Consideration of Language and Power:
    Lehan favors process over discourse and may downplay how language itself produces historical consciousness and is inseparable from power structures—as emphasized by Foucault and others.
  • Reassertion of Grand Narratives:
    His insistence on historical continuity and developmental models can be critiqued for reasserting teleological or totalizing grand narratives, which postmodern and poststructuralist theorists deliberately resist.
  • Neglect of Marginalized Voices:
    The article focuses heavily on canonical texts and dominant ideologies, with little engagement with how New Historicism has been applied to issues of race, gender, colonialism, and class from subaltern perspectives.
Representative Quotations from “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan with Explanation
QuotationPageExplanation
“I could just as well have entitled it ‘The Consequences of the Synchronic—or the Dangers of Spatializing Time.'”533Lehan introduces his critique of New Historicism by suggesting that its focus on synchronic (static) time over diachronic (sequential) time distorts historical understanding, a central theme of his essay.
“Since the seventeenth century our ways of talking about history have come off of three dominant models.”534He outlines three historical paradigms—Enlightenment, Romantic, and Postmodern—to contextualize New Historicism within a broader evolution of historical thought, emphasizing its postmodern roots.
“Much of the new historicism assumes that history has no direction even as it takes the idea of direction as its object of attack.”535This highlights Lehan’s argument that New Historicism’s rejection of historical progression is itself ideological, contradicting its claim to neutrality.
“What I am suggesting is that the direction we believe time takes has a political quotient to it, even (perhaps especially) when such a belief is denied.”535Lehan asserts that denying historical direction (as New Historicism does) is a political act, embedding ideology in its methodology despite its claims otherwise.
“In denying history, we affirm it, because our denial can never be separated from a historical context.”536He argues that attempts to escape history (e.g., through synchronic analysis) are inherently historical, as they are shaped by the moment of their articulation.
“Foucault’s epistemes replace narrative line, become ‘diagnoses’ or contexts for historical discourse, and hence function much like Kuhn’s paradigms.”539Lehan critiques Foucault’s static epistemes, adopted by New Historicism, for lacking narrative continuity, reducing history to disconnected snapshots rather than a process.
“What Michaels does is to give us a postmodern Sister Carrie at the expense of the realistic/naturalistic text.”542Using Walter Benn Michaels’s reading of Dreiser’s novel, Lehan illustrates how New Historicism’s tropological focus distorts the text’s historical and naturalistic essence.
“The new historicism, firmly modeled on Foucault, is thus fraught with its own problematics.”543He questions the coherence and subjectivity of New Historicism’s methodology, suggesting it cannot escape the historical biases it seeks to avoid.
“Time is not language, and language is not time. We can speak about time in language, but this is not identical with the way we experience time.”545Lehan emphasizes the distinction between linguistic representation and lived temporal experience, arguing that New Historicism’s focus on language overlooks narrative time’s role in texts.
“Once the idea of literary periods gives way to the idea of historical process, we can then see the connection between such literary and cultural movements.”552He advocates for a process-oriented approach to history, linking literary forms (e.g., naturalism, modernism) to cultural shifts, countering New Historicism’s static view.
Suggested Readings: “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism” by Richard Lehan
  1. Lehan, Richard. “The Theoretical Limits of the New Historicism.” New Literary History, vol. 21, no. 3, 1990, pp. 533–53. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/469124. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  2. HOPPS, GAVIN. “Conclusion: Poiesis and Metaphysics.” Enchantment in Romantic Literature, Liverpool University Press, 2025, pp. 459–76. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.13083370.15. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  3. Nealon, Jeffrey T. “Exteriority and Appropriation: Foucault, Derrida, and the Discipline of Literary Criticism.” Cultural Critique, no. 21, 1992, pp. 97–119. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1354118. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.

“New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters: Summary and Critique

“New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism and Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters first appeared in 2000 in the journal New Literary History.

"New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology" by Jürgen Pieters: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters

“New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism and Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters first appeared in 2000 in the journal New Literary History. In this article, Pieters provides a critical intervention into New Historicism by situating it within the broader discourse of postmodern historiography. Drawing parallels between the literary-critical practices of Stephen Greenblatt and Louis Montrose and the historical theories of thinkers like Frank Ankersmit and Hayden White, Pieters argues that New Historicism should be viewed not as a departure from historicism, but as a postmodern evolution of it. He identifies two key currents within postmodern historiography—narrativism (epitomized by Foucault’s discursive archaeology) and heterology (inspired by de Certeau’s psychoanalytic and “other-oriented” historiography)—and shows how Greenblatt’s work partakes in both. Through his close analysis of Greenblatt’s strategic use of historical anecdotes, Pieters highlights how New Historicism vacillates between reconstructing historical discourse (narrativism) and revealing history’s unconscious repressions (heterology). Importantly, he critiques Greenblatt’s tendency to reject the label “historicism” altogether, arguing instead that New Historicism, in its nuanced rejection of naive realism and emphasis on contingency, is a “truer” form of historicism. The article is pivotal in literary theory as it provides a robust theoretical scaffolding for understanding the postmodern roots and epistemological stakes of New Historicist criticism.

Summary of “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters

🔍 New Historicism as a Postmodern Historiographical Method

  • Pieters establishes that New Historicism shares theoretical ground with postmodern historiography, especially the narrativist historicism of Frank Ankersmit and the heterological theory of Michel de Certeau.
  • He takes Catherine Belsey’s remark that “at its most brilliant, its most elegant, New Historicism is characteristically postmodern” (p. 21) as a springboard for his analysis.

⚖️ Rejection of Traditional Historicism

  • New historicists like Greenblatt and Montrose repudiate the objectivist and positivist assumptions of earlier historicists, who viewed history as a unified, knowable monolith.
  • Greenblatt critiques traditional historicism’s adherence to three flawed beliefs: deterministic views of history, value-neutrality, and a reverence for the past:

“Most of the writing labelled new historicist… has set itself resolutely against each of these positions” (Greenblatt, Learning to Curse, p. 164; quoted p. 23).


📚 Terminological Confusion: Historicism vs. Historism

  • Pieters notes that Greenblatt conflates Hegelian teleological historicism with Rankean empiricism, though they are historiographically distinct.
  • Frank Ankersmit recommends labeling the latter “historism,” reserving “historicism” for speculative philosophies of history like Hegel’s (Aesthetic Politics, p. 375-6; cited p. 23).

🧩 Narrativist Historicism: Constructing, Not Discovering, Coherence

  • According to Ankersmit, narrativist historians do not uncover pre-existing coherence in history, but rather construct it through discourse:

“Narrativists… believe that the historian’s language does not reflect a coherence… in the past itself, but only gives coherence to the past” (History and Tropology, p. 155; quoted p. 26).


📖 Greenblatt’s Dialogical History: Listening to the Past’s Multiple Voices

  • Greenblatt sees history as a dialogue both within the past and between past and present, echoing Gadamer’s hermeneutics:

“While speaking about the past, [historians] also talk to it” (p. 25).


🔁 Two Strands of Postmodern Historicism: Narrativism and Heterology

  • Pieters defines narrativism (Foucault) as focused on discourse and systems of knowledge; it analyzes how epochs construct meaning through discursive formations.
  • Heterology (Certeau) is more psychoanalytic, concerned with the repressed “other” of history—that which resists representation:

“The repressed… returns in our descriptions of [the past]” (p. 28).


📚 Greenblatt as Both Narrativist and Heterologist

  • Greenblatt’s method combines both approaches via his distinctive use of historical anecdotes.
  • These anecdotes function both as discursive nodes (narrativist) and as sites of estrangement and alterity (heterological):

“The anecdote both serves as the central locus of a culture’s dispersive nature… and as the site where history’s other can be brought to the fore” (p. 29).


🔬 The Anecdote: Bridge Between Narrative and the Real

  • Anecdotes provide textual entry points into historical energies and subjectivities, yet their connection to reality is constructed, not mimetic:

“[The] anecdote… exceeds its literary status… [and] uniquely refers to the real” (Joel Fineman, quoted p. 37).

  • Greenblatt’s term “social energy” captures this effect: moments that transmit affect across time and social structures, though their origin is not empirically fixed:

“The term implies something measurable, yet I cannot provide a convenient and reliable formula… it is manifested in the capacity to produce… collective experiences” (Shakespearean Negotiations, p. 6; quoted p. 33).


🎭 Cultural Zones and Discursive Systems

  • In Shakespearean Negotiations, Greenblatt expands on how cultural “zones” like religion, theater, or politics regulate discourse and meaning.
  • Influenced by Foucault, these zones are not discrete but interconnected through the circulation of symbolic materials and power:

“Zones… are societal spaces whose specificity is functionally determined by the discourses that are proper to them” (p. 32).


📡 Resonance and Wonder: Dual Function of Cultural Artifacts

  • Greenblatt theorizes two aesthetic-historical effects:
    • Resonance: cultural artifacts reflect historical systems.
    • Wonder: they also provoke estrangement and attention to singularity.

“It is the function of the new historicism continually to renew the marvelous at the heart of the resonant” (Learning to Curse, p. 181; quoted p. 36).


🪞 The Risk of Regression: Historicism’s Return?

  • Pieters warns that Greenblatt’s use of “social energy” may unintentionally reintroduce metaphysical coherence, akin to traditional historicism’s “historical idea”:

“Anecdotes will no longer serve as scenes of dispersal, but as… manifestations of social energy” (p. 34).


Conclusion: A Hybrid Heuristic Practice

  • Pieters concludes that Greenblatt’s method is best seen as a hybrid, drawing strength from both narrativist and heterological postmodern historiography.
  • The tension between discursive construction and yearning for the real is not a flaw but a heuristic asset, grounding New Historicism’s critical potential.
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters
ConceptDefinition / DescriptionKey References / Examples
New HistoricismA literary-critical method that emphasizes the historicity of texts and the textuality of history, rejecting traditional objectivist views of historical truth.Associated with Stephen Greenblatt and Louis Montrose; rooted in poststructuralism and critical of older historicist methods (Pieters, p. 21–22).
Postmodern HistoricismA form of historiography that recognizes the contingency and constructed nature of historical narratives.Coined by Frank Ankersmit and linked with Hayden White, it emphasizes the discursive (narrativist) or psychoanalytical (heterological) structuring of historical writing.
NarrativismA historiographical approach that views history as narrative construction, not factual reproduction.Draws from Ankersmit and Foucault; emphasizes coherence via discourse rather than “real” historical events (Pieters, p. 24–25).
HeterologyA method that focuses on the “other” of history—what is repressed, silenced, or excluded in historical narratives.Based on Michel de Certeau’s psychoanalytic historiography; explores history’s absences through anecdote and textual margins (Pieters, p. 27–28).
Historicism vs. HistorismDistinction between speculative, teleological philosophies of history (Historicism) and empirical, document-based approaches (Historism).Pieters critiques Greenblatt’s conflation of these; Ankersmit proposes using “Historism” for Ranke and “Historicism” for Hegel (Pieters, p. 23).
Double Transparency PostulateThe traditional view that texts transparently reflect historical reality and authorial intent.Critiqued by postmodern historiographers; replaced with focus on discursive production (Ankersmit, in Pieters, p. 24).
Historical Idea (Historische Idee)The coherent concept through which a historical period or entity is interpreted, giving it structure and meaning.Originates in von Humboldt; reinterpreted by Ankersmit as a discursive projection rather than a real feature of the past (Pieters, p. 26).
Cultural DispositifA Foucauldian term for the complex network of texts, practices, and institutions that form a discursive system.Greenblatt adopts this in Renaissance Self-Fashioning and Shakespearean Negotiations to analyze cultural production (Pieters, p. 30–31).
Social EnergyThe symbolic and affective power that certain cultural objects or texts exert within a historical society.Greenblatt uses this to explain shared emotional reactions to texts and practices (Pieters, p. 33).
Anecdotal HeuristicsThe method of beginning analysis with historical anecdotes to reveal cultural mechanisms and contradictions.Central to Greenblatt’s style; serves both narrativist (structural) and heterological (disruptive) functions (Pieters, p. 31–38).
Resonance and WonderAesthetic and interpretive terms used to balance contextual understanding with textual uniqueness in literary analysis.Pieters discusses Greenblatt’s essay “Resonance and Wonder” as exemplifying this dialectic (Pieters, p. 36–37).
Dialogue with the DeadThe idea that historical inquiry involves a metaphorical conversation between the historian and figures of the past.Inspired by Machiavelli and developed by Greenblatt, highlighting the historian’s involvement in the construction of meaning (Pieters, p. 25, 34).
Effet de réelA rhetorical device that produces a “reality effect” in narrative, simulating direct contact with historical reality.Referenced via Barthes; used to critique the illusion that anecdotes give unmediated access to the past (Pieters, p. 38).
Contribution of “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters to Literary Theory/Theories

🔍 1. Postmodern Historiography

  • Bridges literary criticism and historiographical theory by aligning New Historicism with the postmodern critique of historical objectivity.
  • Draws directly on Frank Ankersmit’s “narrativist historicism”, showing that New Historicism shares postmodern skepticism about historical facts and emphasizes discursive construction (Pieters, p. 24).

“[N]ew historicism can indeed be regarded as the literary-historical counterpart to recent, ‘postmodern’ developments in the theory of history” (Pieters, p. 22).


🧩 2. New Historicism

  • Clarifies the theoretical ambiguity in Stephen Greenblatt’s rejection of the term “historicism”, revealing that Greenblatt’s approach aligns more with a revised, postmodern form of historicism rather than rejecting it outright (Pieters, p. 23).
  • Identifies dual methodologies within New Historicism:
    • Narrativism (influenced by Foucault)
    • Heterology (inspired by de Certeau)
      → This dual typology deepens understanding of New Historicist practice (Pieters, p. 27).

“To fully characterize Greenblatt’s reading method, we do well to distinguish between two variants of postmodern historicism” (Pieters, p. 21).


🗣3. Discourse Theory / Foucauldian Criticism

  • Shows how Foucauldian “archaeology” and “genealogy” inform New Historicist methods of cultural analysis (Pieters, p. 29–30).
  • Introduces the concept of “cultural dispositifs”, systems of discursive and institutional formation, rooted in Foucault’s theory, as central to Greenblatt’s method.

“Such discursive systems resemble what Michel Foucault has termed cultural ‘dispositifs'” (Pieters, p. 30).


🧠 4. Psychoanalytic Historiography (via Michel de Certeau)

  • Emphasizes the role of repression and the unconscious in history-writing, grounding the heterological variant of New Historicism in psychoanalytic theory.
  • Certeau’s “return of the repressed” is linked to Greenblatt’s use of anecdotes as sites where the silenced or marginalized resurfaces (Pieters, p. 27–28, 35).

“The repressed… returns in our descriptions of it. The repressed… is there in its absence” (Pieters, p. 28).


📖 5. Narrative Theory / Theory of Representation

  • Applies the “historical idea” (from Humboldt via Ankersmit) as a literary-critical tool for interpreting Greenblatt’s concept of self-fashioning as a narrative function rather than a historical “fact” (Pieters, p. 26).
  • Shows how historical narratives do not discover structures in the past but impose them, reinforcing poststructuralist views of narrative mediation (Pieters, p. 25).

“Narrativists believe that the historian’s language… gives coherence to the past” (Pieters, p. 25).


🎭 6. Cultural Materialism / Cultural Poetics

  • Deepens cultural materialist theory by detailing how social energy—as used by Greenblatt—circulates between cultural zones and texts, shaping meaning (Pieters, p. 33).
  • Emphasizes that literary texts are active agents in cultural discourse, not passive reflections of social reality.

“[Cultural] zones are societal spaces… whose specificity is functionally determined by the discourses that are proper to them” (Pieters, p. 32).


🧵 7. Rhetoric and Aesthetics

  • Reframes Greenblatt’s aesthetic terms “resonance” and “wonder” as rhetorical devices that negotiate between historical context and textual autonomy (Pieters, p. 36).
  • Connects “social energy” to rhetorical traditions via Aristotle’s energeia, reviving classical poetics within a postmodern historiographical frame (Pieters, p. 33–34).

“Its origins lie in rhetoric rather than physic… the metaphor refers to the power of language to cause in the reader ‘a stir to the mind'” (Pieters, p. 33).


✍️ 8. Critical Hermeneutics

  • Applies Gadamerian insight about the historian’s historicity and the dialogical nature of understanding the past (Pieters, p. 22, 25).
  • Strengthens literary hermeneutics by recognizing that all readings are historically situated dialogues rather than objective reconstructions.

“[W]hile speaking about the past, [historians] also talk to it” (Pieters, p. 25).

Examples of Critiques Through “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters
Literary WorkCritique ApproachNew Historicist Method AppliedExplanation (Based on Pieters)
William Shakespeare’s OthelloNarrativist + HeterologicalUse of historical anecdotes to parallel themes of manipulation and identity constructionGreenblatt juxtaposes Othello with Peter Martyr’s De Orbe Novo to illustrate how both use “improvisation” to control others; this reflects early modern discourses of self and racialized otherness (Pieters, pp. 29–30).
William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of VeniceNarrativistAnalysis of social zones (religion, law, commerce) and circulation of social energyGreenblatt explores how discourses of economics and anti-Semitism intersect in Shylock’s character, reflecting Renaissance anxieties about outsiders within systems of power (Pieters, p. 32).
Shakespeare’s Cross-Dressing Comedies (Twelfth Night, As You Like It)NarrativistMapping discursive formations around gender and identityUsing Jacques Duval’s medical treatise on hermaphroditism, Greenblatt analyzes gender fluidity and theatricality in these plays as cultural negotiations of Renaissance sexual anxieties (Pieters, p. 32).
Michel de Montaigne’s Travel Journal (as source) → Shakespeare’s ComediesHeterologicalMicrostoria as site of cultural repression and estrangementGreenblatt uses Montaigne’s account of gender ambiguity to uncover how suppressed social anxieties return in Shakespeare’s comedies; anecdotes act as echoes of the “repressed” (Pieters, pp. 33–34).
Criticism Against “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters

  • ⚠️ Ambiguity in Greenblatt’s Positioning
    Pieters admits that it’s difficult to place Stephen Greenblatt definitively within either the narrativist or heterological tradition:

“His reading method can be said to contain traces of both approaches.” (p. 28)
This lack of clarity may weaken the heuristic value of the narrativist/heterological divide itself.

  • ⚠️ Tension Between Theory and Practice
    Although the essay establishes theoretical foundations (via Ankersmit, Foucault, Certeau), Pieters acknowledges Greenblatt’s resistance to theorization and his tendency to blur philosophical distinctions for rhetorical purposes:

“Greenblatt tries to take the two under one and the same umbrella, without wondering about the appropriateness of doing so.” (p. 23)

  • ⚠️ Risk of Sliding into Traditional Historicism
    Pieters warns that despite New Historicism’s postmodern claims, it may inadvertently revert to traditional historicist assumptions—particularly through its search for cultural coherence via concepts like “social energy”:

“This logic may ultimately be taken to imply that the historian… will be able to get in touch with the real of the past.” (p. 34)

  • ⚠️ Problem of “Arbitrary Connectedness”
    Greenblatt’s use of anecdotes (as discussed by Pieters) has been criticized for lacking causal or methodological rigor:

“What is the exact nature of the relationship between Iago’s attitude and that of the Spanish conquistadores?” (p. 31)
Critics like Walter Cohen argue this leads to thematic free association rather than disciplined historical analysis.

  • ⚠️ Anecdote as a Double-Edged Method
    While the anecdote offers insight into cultural systems (resonance/wonder), its referential ambiguity raises problems:

“The anecdote both serves as the central locus of a culture’s dispersive nature… and as the site where history’s other can be brought to the fore.” (p. 28)
This duality complicates claims to either historicist precision or heterological disruption.

  • ⚠️ Overreliance on Poststructuralist Canon
    Pieters’ reliance on Foucault, Certeau, and Ankersmit, while insightful, may limit alternative historicist models (e.g. Marxist materialism, feminist historiography), narrowing the theoretical diversity.
  • ⚠️ Potential Idealization of Anecdotal Heuristics
    The trust placed in “thick description” and cultural micro-events risks romanticizing isolated fragments, while neglecting broader socio-economic structures or empirical history.
  • ⚠️ Methodological Vagueness of “Social Energy”
    Pieters acknowledges Greenblatt’s own uncertainty in defining this concept:

“The question of the true essence of social energy is to a large extent unanswerable.” (p. 33)

Representative Quotations from “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters with Explanation
QuotationExplanation / Theoretical Relevance
1. “At its most brilliant, its most elegant, New Historicism is characteristically postmodern.”Pieters underscores New Historicism’s alignment with postmodern historiography, highlighting its rejection of grand narratives and embrace of multiplicity, contingency, and irony.
2. “Greenblatt actually lumps together two distinct historiographical practices that are better kept apart.”This critiques Greenblatt’s oversimplification of ‘historicism’, pushing for conceptual clarity between speculative philosophies of history (e.g., Hegel) and empiricist historiography (e.g., Ranke).
3. “Narrativists believe that the historian’s language does not reflect a coherence… but only gives coherence to the past.”Reflects Frank Ankersmit’s narrativist view: history is not discovered but constructed through narrative forms, shaping New Historicism’s discursive approach to historical texts.
4. “Greenblatt proposes a fully dialogical practice.”Describes New Historicism’s methodological departure from monological history by emphasizing dialogue—between texts, and between past and present.
5. “The mansion of postmodernist historicism contains many rooms.”A metaphor used by Pieters to acknowledge the diversity within postmodern historical practices—specifically distinguishing between narrativism (Foucault) and heterology (de Certeau).
6. “The anecdote both serves as the central locus of a culture’s dispersive nature and as the site where history’s other can be brought to the fore.”Pieters defines the anecdote as a hybrid tool in New Historicism—both structuring historical knowledge and revealing the margins of that knowledge.
7. “What binds together cultural practices… is the notion of social energy.”Refers to Greenblatt’s concept of ‘social energy’, which explains how cultural forms acquire shared meaning and affect across social zones.
8. “Greenblatt wants the historian to be true to his calling and become a ‘conjurer’ (un illusioniste) who presents the past as if it were real.”Reveals Greenblatt’s theatrical vision of history—less about facts, more about performance and resonance, stressing the constructed nature of ‘historical reality’.
9. “New Historicism aims to rescue historicism from the metaphysical realism which marred its older versions.”Pieters defends New Historicism as a revitalization, not a rejection, of historicist traditions—only without naive assumptions of objectivity.
10. “It is the function of the new historicism continually to renew the marvelous at the heart of the resonant.”Captures the dual function of New Historicist reading: historical contextualization (‘resonance’) and aesthetic uniqueness (‘wonder’).
Suggested Readings: “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism And Heterology” by Jürgen Pieters
  1. Pieters, Jürgen. “New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography between Narrativism and Heterology.” History and Theory, vol. 39, no. 1, 2000, pp. 21–38. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2677996. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  2. Bristol, Michael. “Macbeth the Philosopher: Rethinking Context.” New Literary History, vol. 42, no. 4, 2011, pp. 641–62. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41328990. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
  3. Sheppard, Beth M. “Emergence of a Discipline: Methods from Antiquity to the Modern Era.” The Craft of History and the Study of the New Testament, Society of Biblical Literature, 2012, pp. 95–136. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt32c07n.9. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.

“Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead: Summary and Critique

“Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead first appeared in Critical Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 1, in the early 1990s.

"Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature" by James Snead: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead

“Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead first appeared in Critical Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 1, in the early 1990s. In this work, Snead critiques postmodernist literary theory and its failure to engage with issues of race, particularly in relation to Blackness. He argues that poststructuralist theorists such as Derrida, Barthes, and DeMan, despite their claims of dismantling hierarchies and binaries, perpetuate an exclusionary Eurocentrism that ignores non-Western contributions to intellectual and literary traditions. Snead highlights the paradox wherein postmodernist thought, while deconstructing traditional power structures, continues to operate within a framework that marginalizes Black voices, treating them as either absent or emblematic of otherness without substantive engagement. He extends this critique to postmodernist literature, where Black characters are often depicted as symbolic rather than fully realized individuals. Through detailed analysis, Snead demonstrates how even supposedly progressive literary and theoretical movements can replicate racist exclusions. His work remains crucial in literary studies, compelling scholars to interrogate the racial blind spots within critical theory and the continued dominance of whiteness in intellectual discourse.

Summary of “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead
  • Repression of Race in Literary Criticism
    • Snead critiques the academic field of literary criticism for its historical tendency to suppress discussions of race. He describes a “habit of repression, a structure of avoidance” (Snead, p. 32) regarding Blackness in literary discourse.
  • The Myth of Objectivity in New Criticism
    • Initially, Snead believed in the New Critical approach, which emphasized textual autonomy and universal laws, assuming that “blackness, racism, and discrimination took second place” to literary excellence (Snead, p. 32). However, he later realized that this framework implicitly upheld racial biases.
  • Poststructuralism’s False Promise of Liberation
    • Snead initially embraced poststructuralism and deconstruction for their “claims of transforming rigid and habitual systems of value and order in society” (Snead, p. 33). However, he found that poststructuralist theorists such as Derrida and Barthes replicated the same Eurocentric biases, effectively ignoring Black and non-Western intellectual traditions.
  • Racism in Poststructuralist Theory
    • Despite its claims of dismantling hierarchies, poststructuralism “was anything but a theoretical bridge between text and society” (Snead, p. 33). The works of prominent figures such as Barthes, Derrida, and DeMan systematically omitted racial considerations while reinforcing inherited structures of exclusion.
  • Eurocentric Canon and the Exclusion of Black Voices
    • Snead argues that postmodernist theory re-canonizes Western literary traditions, making “reference-points and acknowledged sources of major postmodernists… as white and as Euro-centric as anything offered under the New Criticism” (Snead, p. 33).
  • Symbolic but Shallow Black Characters in Postmodern Literature
    • Black characters in postmodernist literature are often emblematic rather than fully realized figures. Snead critiques works like Ragtime by E.L. Doctorow, where “Coalhouse Walker… is never fully imagined” but instead serves as a literary symbol rather than a character with depth (Snead, p. 34). Similarly, in John Barth’s The End of the Road, the Black character functions as a “witch doctor caricature” (Snead, p. 34).
  • Historical and Cultural Biases in Western Intellectual Traditions
    • Western thought, from Hegel to Saussure, often positions non-Western knowledge systems as inferior. Snead cites Charles Moraz, who dismissed the idea that “Newtonian or Leibnizian invention could have happened in India or with the Indians in America” (Snead, p. 35), revealing an entrenched Eurocentric view of intellectual history.
  • The Absence of Race in Poststructuralist Discourse
    • Snead points out that poststructuralism’s core concern with language and textual analysis results in a “repression of any mention of race” (Snead, p. 37). This avoidance does not eliminate racial bias but instead “tends to re-introduce the repressed term (‘non-Western’) in a dichotomy where it is still placed below the ‘Western’” (Snead, p. 37).
  • Poststructuralism’s Contradictory Relationship with Non-Western Thought
    • Snead identifies the irony in poststructuralist theories of différance, which emphasize deferred meaning. He argues that this concept parallels African rhythms and oral traditions: “Differance is merely another way of saying ‘suspended beats’” (Snead, p. 38). Yet, theorists like Derrida fail to acknowledge such connections, reinforcing the exclusion of Black intellectual traditions.
  • Conclusion: The Black as a ‘Signifying Absence’
    • Snead concludes that postmodernist theory treats Blackness as a “signifying absence, the signifying other” (Snead, p. 39), continuing a long tradition of Eurocentric discourse that either devalues or ignores non-Western thought.
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead
Theoretical Term/ConceptExplanationReference from Snead’s Text
Repression and AvoidanceThe systematic exclusion of racial discourse in literary theory, especially in postmodernist thought.“A habit of repression, a structure of avoidance so imbedded in its traditional ways of thinking” (Snead, p. 32).
New Criticism’s Objectivity MythThe idea that literary criticism is value-free, focusing only on textual analysis while ignoring race, gender, and class.“For a fairly brief interval in my life, I… was convinced of the value-free status of ‘close reading’” (Snead, p. 32).
Poststructuralist Anti-Hierarchical ClaimsPoststructuralism claims to break down hierarchical structures but paradoxically reaffirms Eurocentric values.“Much, if not most deconstructionist theory was in fact ostensibly non-racial, but definably racist itself” (Snead, p. 33).
Eurocentrism in PostmodernismThe continued dominance of white European perspectives in literary and theoretical discourse.“The reference-points and acknowledged sources of major postmodernists were as white and as Eurocentric as anything offered under the New Criticism” (Snead, p. 33).
Symbolic Representation of BlacknessBlack characters in postmodernist literature often serve as symbols rather than fully developed individuals.“Blacks still ‘represent’ otherness and/or dark areas of the white mind” (Snead, p. 34).
Deconstruction and RaceDerrida’s theory of deconstruction, while intended to dismantle hierarchical binaries, fails to engage with racial discourse.“Poststructuralism’s absolute exclusion of the non-Western… reveals the trace of that non-Western genesis” (Snead, p. 37).
Différance and African RhythmsThe idea of différance (differing and deferring meaning) parallels African rhythm and oral traditions, but poststructuralists ignore this connection.“Differance is merely another way of saying ‘suspended beats’” (Snead, p. 38).
Logocentrism and PhonocentrismThe prioritization of Western written and spoken discourse over other cultural forms of knowledge.“That logocentrism which is also a phonocentrism” (Snead, p. 38).
Signifying AbsenceThe way Blackness is simultaneously referenced and erased in postmodernist theory.“The black is a signifying absence, the signifying other, in the text of postmodernism” (Snead, p. 39).
Contribution of “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Poststructuralism and Deconstruction

  • Critique of Deconstruction’s Supposed Universality
    • Snead argues that despite claiming to dismantle hierarchies, poststructuralism retains a Eurocentric framework that excludes Black and non-Western perspectives.
    • “Much, if not most deconstructionist theory was in fact ostensibly non-racial, but definably racist itself… in the same way as its predecessors had been” (Snead, p. 33).
  • Challenges Derrida’s Notion of Différance
    • Snead identifies parallels between différance and African rhythmic structures, questioning why poststructuralists exclude non-Western traditions.
    • “Differance is merely another way of saying ‘suspended beats’” (Snead, p. 38).
  • Calls Out the Racism of ‘Benign Neglect’
    • While classical Western thinkers engaged with race (even in racist ways), poststructuralists often ignore it entirely, reinforcing exclusion.
    • “They may have arrived at racist definitions of blackness, too, but at least they did not benignly neglect the issue of race altogether” (Snead, p. 38).

2. New Criticism and Formalism

  • Exposes the Myth of Literary Objectivity
    • Snead critiques New Criticism’s claim of “value-free” close reading, showing how it perpetuates racial exclusions.
    • “For a fairly brief interval in my life, I… was convinced of the value-free status of ‘close reading’” (Snead, p. 32).
  • Challenges the Canon’s Supposed Neutrality
    • He argues that both New Criticism and poststructuralism re-canonize Western thinkers while erasing non-Western perspectives.
    • “The reference-points and acknowledged sources of major postmodernists were as white and as Eurocentric as anything offered under the New Criticism” (Snead, p. 33).

3. Postcolonial Theory

  • Critique of Eurocentric Universalism
    • Snead highlights how Western theory positions itself as universal while implicitly excluding Black and non-European perspectives.
    • “The route whereby ‘human’ is taken to mean ‘white European’ is apparent wherever scholars, philosophers, and critics aim for universals” (Snead, p. 36).
  • Challenges the Absence of Third-World Epistemologies
    • He criticizes postmodernist thinkers for failing to engage with intellectual traditions outside the West.
    • “Poststructuralism’s absolute exclusion of the non-Western… reveals the trace of that non-Western genesis” (Snead, p. 37).

4. Critical Race Theory (CRT)

  • Identifies Racism in Theoretical Structures
    • Snead exposes how theoretical frameworks that claim neutrality still reinforce racial exclusions.
    • “Yet here I am, accusing ‘postmodernist theory and literature’ of racism” (Snead, p. 33).
  • Critique of ‘Colorblind’ Intellectualism
    • He argues that ignoring race does not make a discipline non-racist but instead perpetuates systemic racial erasure.
    • “The super-intensive grappling with issues of language… takes the spotlight away from the social referent” (Snead, p. 39).

5. Narrative Theory and Representation Studies

  • Critique of Black Representation in Postmodern Fiction
    • Snead examines how postmodernist literature continues to use Black characters as shallow symbols rather than as fully realized figures.
    • “Blacks still ‘represent’ otherness and/or dark areas of the white mind” (Snead, p. 34).
  • Challenges the Treatment of Blackness as Mere Allegory
    • He critiques how even celebrated postmodernist authors, such as Pynchon and Barth, reduce Black figures to literary devices.
    • “Coalhouse Walker… is never fully imagined, but… is simply used as a black double for Heinrich von Kleist’s nineteenth-century rebel” (Snead, p. 34).

6. Canon Formation and Cultural Criticism

  • Exposes the Whitewashing of Literary and Philosophical Traditions
    • Snead points out that Western thinkers who influence poststructuralism (Hegel, Freud, Derrida) engage in racial exclusion, either explicitly or through omission.
    • “Derrida’s own references… have already described analogous oppositions in terms of ‘non-Western’ versus ‘Western,’ ‘primitive’ versus ‘civilized’ thinking” (Snead, p. 38).
  • Demands a Rethinking of Literary Meritocracy
    • He critiques the assumption that intellectual excellence in literary theory is race-neutral when it is actually shaped by Eurocentric biases.
    • “Surely hiring, promotion, publication, and acclaim would follow, based merely on the integrity of the work. In sharp distinction… academia seemed a virtual refuge of meritocracy” (Snead, p. 32).
Examples of Critiques Through “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead
Literary Work & AuthorSnead’s CritiqueReference from the Article
E.L. Doctorow – Ragtime (1974)The Black character Coalhouse Walker is not fully developed but is used as a symbolic figure rather than a complex individual.“Coalhouse Walker, a potentially interesting figure in Ragtime, is never fully imagined, but… is simply used as a black double for Heinrich von Kleist’s nineteenth-century rebel, Michael Kohlhaas” (Snead, p. 34).
Peter Handke – Short Letter, Long Farewell (1972)The Black elevator operator is a racial stereotype, reflecting the racist imagery common in Hollywood films.“Peter Handke’s ‘old Negro [elevator] operator’ in Short Letter, Long Farewell differs not at all from racist Hollywood depictions of the same” (Snead, p. 34).
John Barth – The End of the Road (1958)The character “the Doctor” is portrayed through the racist “witch doctor” trope, reinforcing harmful stereotypes.“The black character called ‘the Doctor’ in The End of the Road, given his malevolent influence on the main character, is simply an updated ‘witch doctor’ caricature” (Snead, p. 34).
Thomas Pynchon – Gravity’s Rainbow (1973)While Pynchon’s Black characters are more memorable, they are still primarily used to signify depravity and decadence rather than given narrative depth.“Thomas Pynchon’s blacks are at least memorable, though often used to signify depravity and decadence” (Snead, p. 34).
Criticism Against “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead

1. Overgeneralization of Poststructuralism and Deconstruction

  • Critics argue that Snead paints poststructuralist theorists like Derrida and Barthes with a broad brush, failing to acknowledge the nuances in their work.
  • Some scholars note that Derrida, for instance, does engage with non-Western concepts, albeit minimally. His essay “White Mythology” acknowledges the Eurocentrism embedded in Western philosophy.
  • Snead himself admits that “Of all Derrida’s major essays and readings, only the one entitled ‘La Mythologie Blanche’ even comments upon the implications of its title, and of its own whiteness” (Snead, p. 37).

2. Lack of Engagement with Non-Western Critical Traditions

  • While Snead critiques the exclusion of Black and non-Western thought, he does not provide substantive engagement with alternative literary or theoretical frameworks from these traditions.
  • His argument remains centered on critiquing Eurocentric thinkers without offering a clear model for incorporating non-Western intellectual traditions into postmodernist theory.
  • Some critics argue that Snead’s work, despite its important observations, remains embedded in a Western academic framework rather than actively engaging with alternative epistemologies.

3. Dismissal of Postmodernist Literature’s Self-Critique

  • Snead critiques postmodernist literature for reducing Black characters to symbols of otherness, but some scholars argue that these works engage in a self-reflexive critique of racial representation.
  • For example, Thomas Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow is often seen as an interrogation of white supremacy, rather than simply a reinforcement of racist tropes.
  • Critics question whether Snead fully accounts for the irony and metafictional strategies in postmodernist fiction that deliberately expose and critique racial constructs rather than merely perpetuating them.

4. Limited Consideration of Marxist and Materialist Critiques of Race

  • Snead focuses on poststructuralist theory’s failure to address race but does not sufficiently engage with Marxist or materialist critiques, which analyze race in connection with capitalism and class struggle.
  • Some scholars argue that a deeper engagement with Marxist literary criticism or Black Marxist thought (such as Cedric Robinson’s Black Marxism) would have strengthened Snead’s argument by situating race within a broader political economy.

5. Insufficient Discussion of Black and Postcolonial Theorists

  • Snead critiques the absence of race in postmodernist thought but does not extensively engage with Black or postcolonial theorists who have addressed these issues.
  • For instance, scholars like Frantz Fanon, Aimé Césaire, and Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o had already critiqued the Eurocentrism of Western intellectual traditions.
  • Some critics argue that Snead could have strengthened his critique by aligning more explicitly with Afrocentric or postcolonial theoretical traditions rather than focusing mainly on deconstructing Western thinkers.

6. Does Not Provide a Clear Alternative to Postmodernist Theory

  • While Snead effectively critiques the limitations of postmodernist and deconstructionist approaches to race, he does not propose a systematic alternative for incorporating racial and non-Western perspectives into literary theory.
  • Critics argue that the essay raises important questions but stops short of offering concrete solutions for how literary theory should evolve to address race more fully.
Representative Quotations from “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead with Explanation
QuotationExplanation
“A habit of repression, a structure of avoidance so imbedded in its traditional ways of thinking…” (Snead, p. 32)Snead critiques how literary studies have historically suppressed discussions of race, reflecting a broader systemic exclusion of Blackness.
“Poststructuralism’s absolute exclusion of the non-Western… reveals the trace of that non-Western genesis.” (Snead, p. 37)He argues that while poststructuralism claims to be revolutionary, it continues to erase non-Western intellectual traditions, reinforcing Eurocentrism.
“Much, if not most deconstructionist theory was in fact ostensibly non-racial, but definably racist itself.” (Snead, p. 33)Snead calls out deconstruction for failing to engage with racial discourse, arguing that its supposed neutrality masks racial exclusion.
“The reference-points and acknowledged sources of major postmodernists were as white and as Euro-centric as anything offered under the New Criticism.” (Snead, p. 33)He critiques how postmodernist theorists re-canonize European traditions while ignoring or marginalizing non-Western thought.
“Blacks still ‘represent’ otherness and/or dark areas of the white mind.” (Snead, p. 34)Snead highlights how postmodern literature continues to depict Blackness as symbolic rather than allowing for complex, fully developed Black characters.
“The black is a signifying absence, the signifying other, in the text of postmodernism.” (Snead, p. 39)He argues that Blackness in postmodernist theory is both present and erased, existing only in the margins as an absent referent.
“Differance is merely another way of saying ‘suspended beats’.” (Snead, p. 38)Snead critiques Derrida’s différance by drawing a connection between its concept of deferral and African rhythmic structures, which poststructuralists fail to acknowledge.
“Surely hiring, promotion, publication, and acclaim would follow, based merely on the integrity of the work.” (Snead, p. 32)He critiques the myth of literary meritocracy, showing how systemic racism affects academic recognition.
“Coalhouse Walker, a potentially interesting figure in Ragtime, is never fully imagined…” (Snead, p. 34)He criticizes E.L. Doctorow’s novel for using a Black character as a mere symbol rather than a fully realized individual.
“We all perhaps reveal more by the words we avoid than by the words that we use.” (Snead, p. 39)Borrowing from Barthes and Freud, Snead argues that postmodernist theorists’ silence on race is itself a revealing act of exclusion.
Suggested Readings: “Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature” by James Snead
  1. Snead, James. “‘Racist Traces in Postmodernist Theory and Literature’.” Critical Quarterly 33.1 (1991).
  2. James Brunton. “Whose (Meta)Modernism?: Metamodernism, Race, and the Politics of Failure.” Journal of Modern Literature, vol. 41, no. 3, 2018, pp. 60–76. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2979/jmodelite.41.3.05. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.
  3. Wade, Peter. “The Meaning of ‘Race’ and ‘Ethnicity.’” Race and Ethnicity in Latin America, Pluto Press, 2010, pp. 4–23. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt183p73f.6. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.
  4. Minda, Gary. “Critical Race Theory.” Postmodern Legal Movements: Law and Jurisprudence At Century’s End, NYU Press, 1995, pp. 167–86. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qg2gf.14. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.

“Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic: Summary and Critique

“Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic first appeared in 2001 as part of a growing body of interdisciplinary literature that sought to reframe the discussion of race, law, and power in the United States.

"Critical Race Theory: An Introduction" by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic

“Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic first appeared in 2001 as part of a growing body of interdisciplinary literature that sought to reframe the discussion of race, law, and power in the United States. Published by NYU Press and shaped by decades of legal scholarship and activism, this foundational text introduced readers to the origins, principles, and broader implications of Critical Race Theory (CRT). The book builds upon earlier movements such as civil rights, critical legal studies, and radical feminism, while offering an incisive critique of traditional liberal approaches to race and equality. It asserts that racism is not an anomaly but a normal feature of American society, embedded deeply within its structures and institutions. Delgado and Stefancic underscore key CRT concepts like intersectionality, social construction of race, differential racialization, and the “voice of color” thesis, emphasizing that race is not biologically determined but socially constructed and manipulated to serve dominant interests. Particularly influential in literary theory and cultural studies, CRT’s emphasis on narrative, storytelling, and lived experience challenges canonical modes of representation and legitimizes voices traditionally excluded from discourse. This work’s lasting importance lies in its interdisciplinary reach, serving as a cornerstone for subsequent explorations into race, identity, law, and the power of narrative in shaping collective understanding.

Summary of “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic

🔹 1. Racism as Ordinary, Not Aberrational

“Racism is ordinary, not aberrational—‘normal science,’ the usual way society does business, the common, everyday experience of most people of color in this country” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 3).
CRT challenges the assumption that racism is an anomaly and instead emphasizes its systemic, ingrained presence in everyday life.


🔹 2. Interest Convergence & Material Determinism

“Racism advances the interests of both white elites (materially) and working-class people (psychically)” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 3).
This means white society has little motivation to eliminate racism unless it benefits them.


🔹 3. Race as a Social Construct

“Race and races are products of social thought and relations. Not objective, inherent, or fixed… they correspond to no biological or genetic reality” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 3).
CRT emphasizes that race is socially constructed, invented and manipulated based on context.


🔹 4. Microaggressions and Daily Racism

“Social scientists call the event a ‘microaggression,’ by which they mean one of those many sudden, stunning, or dispiriting transactions that mar the days of women and folks of color” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 1).
Even small, often unconscious actions contribute to a larger pattern of racial harm.


🔹 5. Intersectionality and Anti-Essentialism

“No person has a single, easily stated, unitary identity” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 4).
CRT recognizes overlapping identities—race, gender, class, sexuality—and rejects one-size-fits-all categorization.


🔹 6. The Unique Voice of Color

“Minority status… brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 4).
Experiences of people of color provide insights often invisible to white counterparts, justifying the importance of counter-narratives.


🔹 7. Origins in Legal Scholarship and Civil Rights Disillusionment

“CRT sprang up in the mid-1970s, as a number of lawyers, activists, and legal scholars… realized that the heady advances of the civil rights era… had stalled” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 2).
It emerged as a response to the rollback of civil rights reforms and their inadequate reach.


🔹 8. Activist Nature and Transformation

“Unlike some academic disciplines, critical race theory contains an activist dimension… to change [the social situation]” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 2).
CRT is committed to praxis—using knowledge to push for social change, not just analyze structures.


🔹 9. Relationship to Other Movements

“CRT builds on the insights of… critical legal studies and radical feminism… [and] the American radical tradition” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 2).
It is rooted in and influenced by multiple intellectual and political traditions.


🔹 10. Evolving Spin-Off Movements

“New subgroups… include an emerging Asian American jurisprudence, a forceful Latino-critical (LatCrit) contingent, and a feisty queer-crit interest group” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 3).
CRT has diversified into distinct but connected scholarly and activist communities.


🔹 11. Structural Critique of Liberalism

“CRT questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 2).
Rather than trusting the law as neutral or fair, CRT interrogates how legal systems uphold power structures.


🔹 12. Racialization Over Time

“Dominant society racializes different minority groups at different times, in response to shifting needs such as the labor market” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 3).
This dynamic racialization supports exploitative systems depending on socio-economic needs.


🔹 13. Evidence of Persistent Racism

“Blacks and Latinos who seek loans, apartments, or jobs are much more apt than similarly qualified whites to be rejected” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 5).
The data backs up CRT’s claim that systemic racism continues to shape real-life outcomes.


🔹 14. Importance of Narrative and Storytelling

“The ‘legal storytelling’ movement urges black and brown writers to recount their experiences with racism and the legal system” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 4).
Storytelling becomes a method to challenge dominant legal and historical narratives.


Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic
Term/ConceptDefinition/ExplanationQuotation (Source)
MicroaggressionSubtle, often unintentional acts of racism that occur in everyday interactions.“…sudden, stunning, or dispiriting transactions that mar the days of women and folks of color” (p. 1).
Ordinariness of RacismRacism is normal and embedded in everyday life, not an exception.“Racism is ordinary, not aberrational—‘normal science,’ the usual way society does business” (p. 3).
Interest ConvergenceRacial progress occurs only when it aligns with the interests of the white majority.“Racism advances the interests of both white elites (materially) and working-class people (psychically)” (p. 3).
Social Construction of RaceRace is a socially created category without biological basis, shaped by social and political forces.“Race and races are products of social thought and relations… not objective, inherent, or fixed” (p. 3).
Differential RacializationThe dominant society racializes different minority groups in different ways depending on historical and economic needs.“Dominant society racializes different minority groups at different times…” (p. 3).
IntersectionalityPeople possess multiple, overlapping identities (e.g., race, gender, class) that affect their experiences of oppression and privilege.“No person has a single, easily stated, unitary identity” (p. 4).
Anti-EssentialismRejects the idea that all members of a racial or social group share the same experience or perspective.“Everyone has potentially conflicting, overlapping identities…” (p. 4).
Voice of Color ThesisPeople of color possess unique perspectives on race and law based on their lived experiences.“Minority status… brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism” (p. 4).
Legal IndeterminacyThere is no single “correct” legal outcome in many cases; results can vary depending on interpretation.“[Legal cases]… can be decided either way… by emphasizing one line of authority over another” (p. 2).
Revisionist HistoryRe-examining and challenging traditional historical narratives, especially those that portray progress as linear or neutral.Implied through critique of “triumphalist history” and reinterpretation of civil rights law (p. 2).
Critical White StudiesExamines whiteness as a racial category and explores white privilege and the social construction of white identity.“Recently scholars… are examining whites as a group… white privilege…” (p. 5).
Storytelling/CounterstoryThe use of personal narratives to challenge dominant legal and cultural discourses that ignore or marginalize minority experiences.“Urges black and brown writers to recount their experiences… assess law’s master narratives” (p. 4).
Material DeterminismEconomic interests play a central role in shaping racial dynamics and preserving systemic racism.“Racism advances the interests… materially” (p. 3).
Structural DeterminismSocial and legal structures are inherently biased in favor of dominant groups and resistant to change.Mentioned in book organization: “Chapter 2 presents… structural determinism” (p. 5).
Contribution of “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic to Literary Theory/Theories

🔹 1. Narrative Theory / Legal Storytelling

  • Contribution: CRT introduces storytelling and counterstorytelling as valid and necessary tools to disrupt dominant legal and cultural narratives.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: It elevates personal narratives, anecdotes, and lived experiences as central forms of knowledge, aligning with literary theories that emphasize subjectivity and voice.
  • Reference: “The ‘legal storytelling’ movement urges black and brown writers to recount their experiences with racism… to assess law’s master narratives” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 4).

🔹 2. Post-Structuralism / Deconstruction

  • Contribution: CRT questions the neutrality of language, law, and knowledge, and draws from theorists like Jacques Derrida.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: It supports the idea that texts (including laws and histories) are not objective, aligning with post-structuralist views that meaning is unstable and power-laden.
  • Reference: “CRT… questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including… Enlightenment rationalism” (p. 2).

🔹 3. Critical Legal Studies & Literary Indeterminacy

  • Contribution: Embraces legal indeterminacy—that legal texts can be interpreted multiple ways.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: This mirrors the idea in literary theory that texts do not have one fixed meaning, but are open to multiple readings.
  • Reference: “Not every legal case has one correct outcome… one can decide most cases either way” (p. 2).

🔹 4. Intersectionality and Identity Theory

  • Contribution: CRT foregrounds intersectionality and anti-essentialism, challenging the idea of a single, unified identity.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: These concepts are vital to feminist and queer literary theory, which critiques fixed identity categories.
  • Reference: “No person has a single, easily stated, unitary identity” (p. 4).

🔹 5. Postcolonial and Cultural Studies

  • Contribution: CRT critiques dominant culture’s portrayal of race and racialized bodies through differential racialization and stereotyping.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: Aligns with postcolonial theory’s focus on representation, colonial discourse, and racial hierarchies in literature.
  • Reference: “Society racializes different minority groups at different times… Popular images and stereotypes… shift over time” (p. 3).

🔹 6. Reader-Response & Voice-of-Color Thesis

  • Contribution: CRT’s voice-of-color thesis asserts that marginalized readers bring unique insights to interpreting texts.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: Resonates with reader-response theory and theories of positional reading, which value the reader’s social and racial position.
  • Reference: “Minority status… brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism” (p. 4).

🔹 7. Structuralism and Ideology Critique

  • Contribution: CRT critiques the structural biases of legal and societal systems.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: This parallels structuralist and Marxist literary theories, which analyze how texts reflect and reinforce ideological systems.
  • Reference: “CRT… seeks to ascertain how society organizes itself along racial lines and hierarchies” (p. 2).

🔹 8. Revisionist Historiography / Metahistory

  • Contribution: CRT offers revisionist interpretations of history, challenging “triumphalist” narratives.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: This aligns with new historicism and metahistorical criticism, which scrutinize how history is written and for whom.
  • Reference: “Favorable precedent… tends to deteriorate over time, cut back by narrow… interpretation” (p. 2).

🔹 9. Critical Whiteness Studies

  • Contribution: CRT explores whiteness as a constructed racial identity and locus of power.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: Informs critical whiteness theory in literature, examining how whiteness is rendered invisible or normative in texts.
  • Reference: “Critical white studies addresses… whether such a thing as white privilege exists” (p. 5).

🔹 10. Activist Criticism / Transformative Praxis

  • Contribution: CRT insists on engaged, transformative scholarship, not just abstract critique.
  • Significance in Literary Theory: Influences activist criticism—approaches that seek real-world change through interpretive work.
  • Reference: “It not only tries to understand our social situation, but to change it” (p. 2).

Examples of Critiques Through “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic
Literary WorkCRT Lens AppliedExample of Critique Using CRT ConceptsRelevant CRT Concept
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper LeeChallenges of liberal legalism and the “white savior” narrativeThe novel centers on a white lawyer defending a Black man, yet fails to fully center Black voices or experiences. CRT would critique its reliance on white heroism and its limited challenge to systemic injustice.Critique of Liberalism, Voice-of-Color Thesis
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott FitzgeraldRacial anxieties and the construction of whitenessTom Buchanan’s remarks about “The Rise of the Colored Empires” reveal anxieties about white decline. CRT would expose the racial undertones of class preservation and how race undergirds Gatsby’s social world.Critical Whiteness Studies, Social Construction of Race
Heart of Darkness by Joseph ConradColonial narratives and dehumanization of BlacknessAfrican characters are voiceless and symbolic rather than human. CRT would critique how the text perpetuates colonial hierarchies by presenting Africa as a backdrop for white moral reflection.Dehumanization, Racialization, Revisionist History
Beloved by Toni MorrisonCounter-narrative and reclaiming voice through historical traumaMorrison provides a powerful voice of color in narrating the trauma of slavery. CRT would highlight how Beloved revises historical silences, asserting a Black female perspective often erased from official histories.Voice-of-Color Thesis, Intersectionality, Storytelling

🔍 How CRT Concepts Apply:
  • Voice-of-Color Thesis: Minoritized writers can articulate experiences and insights inaccessible to white counterparts (Delgado & Stefancic, 2006, p. 4).
  • Critique of Liberalism: Legal equality without structural reform often upholds racial hierarchies (p. 2).
  • Social Construction of Race: Race is a fluid, invented concept used for power and control (p. 3).
  • Critical Whiteness Studies: Whiteness operates as invisible dominance in literature and culture (p. 5).
Criticism Against “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic

🔸 1. Accusation of Pessimism

  • Critics argue CRT is too pessimistic about the permanence of racism in society.
  • Response in the text: Delgado and Stefancic counter by comparing CRT to medicine: “Is medicine pessimistic because it focuses on diseases and traumas?” (p. 6).

🔸 2. Rejection of Enlightenment Principles

  • CRT is critiqued for questioning equality theory, rationalism, and neutral legal principles, which are core to Western liberal thought.
  • Text states: CRT “questions the very foundations of the liberal order” (p. 2), which some view as radical and destabilizing.

🔸 3. Subjectivity over Objectivity

  • Critics claim CRT relies too heavily on personal narratives and subjective experiences (e.g., legal storytelling), which weakens scholarly neutrality.
  • CRT, however, argues that counterstories challenge dominant narratives and are essential for revealing hidden structures of racism (p. 4).

🔸 4. Undermining Colorblindness

  • Some argue CRT rejects the ideal of colorblindness, which they see as crucial for achieving a just society.
  • CRT responds that colorblindness ignores real power dynamics and only addresses overt racism, not structural inequality (p. 3).

🔸 5. Encouragement of Identity Politics

  • CRT is accused of promoting identity-based thinking, potentially leading to division rather than unity.
  • Delgado and Stefancic highlight that intersectionality and anti-essentialism actually deepen understanding of complex social identities (p. 4).

🔸 6. Ideological Bias

  • Some critics (especially from the political Right) argue CRT reflects a left-wing ideological agenda and is activist rather than analytical.
  • CRT embraces this, asserting that theory must also aim to transform society, not just interpret it (p. 2).

🔸 7. Relativism and Legal Indeterminacy

  • The concept of legal indeterminacy—that legal outcomes can be shaped by power and interpretation—is seen as threatening to legal consistency.
  • CRT uses this to critique how legal systems serve dominant interests, especially in civil rights (p. 2).

🔸 8. Essentialism of the “Voice of Color”

  • Tension exists within CRT itself between anti-essentialism and the voice-of-color thesis.
  • Critics argue it risks reducing individuals to their racial identities, though CRT acknowledges this tension (p. 4).

🔸 9. Perceived Lack of Empirical Evidence

  • Detractors argue CRT relies more on anecdotal experience than empirical, data-driven analysis.
  • CRT counters that many forms of racism are difficult to quantify and often masked by institutional practices (p. 5).

Representative Quotations from “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic with Explanation
QuotationExplanation
1. “Racism is ordinary, not aberrational—‘normal science,’ the usual way society does business…” (p. 3)This foundational CRT idea challenges the myth that racism is an exception; it is routine and systemic in everyday life and institutions.
2. “Microaggressions… mar the days of women and folks of color” (p. 1)Highlights how small, often unintentional acts of exclusion or hostility accumulate to reinforce racial hierarchies.
3. “Critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order…” (p. 2)CRT challenges supposedly ‘neutral’ concepts like equality, legal objectivity, and Enlightenment rationalism, asserting they often mask systemic inequality.
4. “The movement… contains an activist dimension… to change [our social situation]” (p. 2)CRT is not merely an academic theory; it seeks to transform society by addressing racial injustices actively.
5. “Race and races are products of social thought and relations…” (p. 3)Rejects the notion that race is biologically real; instead, it’s a social construct used for power and classification.
6. “Minority status… brings with it a presumed competence to speak about race and racism” (p. 4)The voice-of-color thesis argues that people of color can offer insights into racial issues that white people, due to lack of experience, may not fully grasp.
7. “No person has a single, easily stated, unitary identity” (p. 4)Emphasizes intersectionality, the idea that identity is multi-layered (e.g., race, gender, class) and cannot be understood through a single lens.
8. “Society racializes different minority groups at different times…” (p. 3)Refers to differential racialization: society assigns shifting stereotypes and values to racial groups based on political/economic needs (e.g., labor, war).
9. “From conventional civil rights thought, the movement took… the insistence that legal and social theory have practical consequences” (p. 2)CRT values theory that engages with real-world injustice, rejecting abstract frameworks that don’t address lived experiences.
10. “Consider… that Brown v. Board… may have resulted more from the self-interest of elite whites than a desire to help blacks” (p. 3)Reflects interest convergence theory: racial progress often occurs only when it benefits white interests. It critiques liberal narratives that overemphasize altruism in civil rights victories.
Suggested Readings: “Critical Race Theory: An Introduction” by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic
  1. Brooks, Roy L., and Mary Jo Newborn.
    “Critical Race Theory and Classical-Liberal Civil Rights Scholarship: A Distinction Without a Difference.” California Law Review, vol. 82, no. 4, 1994, pp. 787–845.
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3480917
  2. Calmore, John O.
    “Critical Race Theory, Archie Shepp, and Fire Music: Securing an Authentic Intellectual Life in a Multicultural World.” Southern California Law Review, vol. 65, no. 6, 1992, pp. 2129–2231.
    https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/sclr65&i=2151
  3. Delgado, Richard, and Jean Stefancic, editors.
    Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge. 2nd ed., Temple University Press, 2000.
    https://philpapers.org/rec/DELCRT-2
  4. Haney López, Ian F.
    “The Social Construction of Race: Some Observations on Illusion, Fabrication, and Choice.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, vol. 29, 1994, pp. 1–62. https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1115043/files/fulltext.pdf

“Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda: Summary and Critique

“Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda first appeared in 1995 as a chapter in the book Postmodern Legal Movements: Law and Jurisprudence at Century’s End, published by NYU Press.

"Critical Race Theory" by Gary Minda: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda

“Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda first appeared in 1995 as a chapter in the book Postmodern Legal Movements: Law and Jurisprudence at Century’s End, published by NYU Press. Minda traces the emergence of Critical Race Theory (CRT) in the late 1980s as a response to the limitations of both traditional civil rights law and the Critical Legal Studies (CLS) movement. Rooted in the lived experiences, cultural narratives, and intellectual traditions of people of color—especially African Americans—CRT offers a race-conscious epistemology that critiques the ostensibly neutral, color-blind legal standards that often reinforce systemic racism. Minda situates CRT within postmodern jurisprudential thought, highlighting its foundational arguments: that race and racism are ingrained in the fabric of legal and social systems, that experiential knowledge from marginalized communities must be central to legal scholarship, and that narrative, storytelling, and identity politics are legitimate and necessary tools for exposing racial subordination. The chapter underscores the significance of CRT in transforming both legal analysis and broader literary theory by challenging universalist and meritocratic paradigms. Minda’s account foregrounds figures like Derrick Bell, Richard Delgado, Mari Matsuda, and Kimberlé Crenshaw, who critiqued mainstream legal discourse for its exclusion of minority perspectives and introduced new interpretive practices that link law with culture, identity, and ideology. As a contribution to legal and literary theory, this chapter establishes CRT as a transformative framework that exposes the racial hierarchies embedded within supposedly objective legal structures.

Summary of “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda

🔍 Origins and Epistemology of CRT

  • Experience of People of Color as Legal Epistemology: CRT emerged as a legal theory based on “actual experience, history, culture, and intellectual tradition of people of color” (p. 167).
  • Race-Conscious Jurisprudence: It calls for “fundamental changes in the way the law constructs knowledge about race” (p. 167).

⚖️ Critique of Color-Blindness and Formal Equality

  • Legal Equality Measured Against Whiteness: Traditional legal thinking uses “white” as a benchmark to determine equality (p. 167).
  • Color-Blind Standards Reinforce Racism: CRT argues these standards “convince minorities that racial discrimination can only be eradicated” via meritocracy, which “accord[s] whites and blacks the same formal rights and process” (p. 167–168).
  • Race as Cultural Identity: CRT views skin color as “a symbol of cultural and personal identity constructed by white society” (p. 168).

📚 Racial Critiques of Traditional Legal Scholarship

  • Exclusion from Civil Rights Scholarship: Richard Delgado critiqued civil rights literature for being “held captive by a group of elite white ‘imperial scholars’” (p. 169).
  • Segregated Legal Academia: Mari Matsuda called the system “segregated scholarship,” arguing that “victims of racial oppression have distinct normative insights” (p. 172).
  • Racial Distinctiveness Thesis: Minority scholars “share an awareness of racial oppression” that provides their scholarship with a unique perspective (p. 172).

📖 Narrative Jurisprudence & Voice of Color

  • Storytelling as Method: CRT scholars use “allegories, metaphors, chronicles, and parables” to convey the racialized experience (p. 173).
  • Voice of Color Justified: Like feminist legal scholars, CRT scholars argue that race and gender “are said to be prerequisites for speaking and writing on” discrimination (p. 173).

🧠 Critique of Critical Legal Studies (CLS)

  • Failure to Address Race: Kimberlé Crenshaw criticized CLS for “fail[ing] to address the reality of racial oppression” (p. 174).
  • Victim vs. Perpetrator Perspective: Alan Freeman’s analysis of civil rights law showed it focused on “perpetrator perspective,” missing the “experience of racial discrimination and oppression” (p. 175).
  • Rights as a Double-Edged Sword: Crenshaw argued rights discourse has transformative potential, even if co-opted by liberalism (p. 176).

🎤 The Racial Critiques Debate

  • Kennedy vs. CRT Scholars: Randall Kennedy criticized CRT’s “race-based standing” as “anti-intellectual” and warned it might “silence important contributions of white race scholars” (p. 176–177).
  • Defenses of CRT: Critics of Kennedy emphasized that “translation” and cross-cultural understanding are essential in academia (p. 177).
  • Postmodernism’s Influence: The debate links CRT to “the multicultural discourses of postmodernism” (p. 178).

🧬 Race Consciousness and Identity Politics

  • Race as Cultural Heritage: Crenshaw and Patricia Williams treat terms like “Black” as reflecting “heritage, experience, and cultural and personal identity” (p. 179).
  • Race and Deconstruction: CRT uses “deconstruction” (Derrida) to show how binary oppositions like intelligent/unintelligent map onto white/Black (p. 180).
  • Hegemony and Myth: CRT applies Gramsci’s theory of hegemony to explain how “white norms” become culturally dominant (p. 181).

🌎 Postmodern Nationalism and Multiculturalism

  • Move Beyond Black-White Binary: CRT recognizes the need to address racism unique to groups like Asian Americans, who “suffer not just generically as persons of color” (p. 183).
  • Postmodern Nationalism: Advocates like Gary Peller call for racial identity to be understood “not from a fantasized past but through lived cultural practices” (p. 183).
  • Multivocality of Race: CRT argues for the recognition of “multiple identities and subjective experiences of people of color” (p. 184).

♀️ Intersectionality and Black Feminist Critique

  • Black Feminist Voices: Black feminists express the need for their “own narratives of the complicated nature posed by the interrelated forces of racism and sexism” (p. 185).
  • Anita Hill Case: Crenshaw shows how Hill’s identity as a Black woman was suppressed, unlike Thomas’s more resonant appeal to racial imagery (p. 185).

🧩 Final Reflections

  • Race-Conscious Law as a Necessity: CRT calls for a race-conscious legal theory to “enable different racial groups to live together in a multicultural and racially diverse society” (p. 184).
  • Critique of Legal Modernism: Postmodern race theory “decenters” universalist and color-blind models in favor of contextualized, identity-based approaches (p. 185).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda
Theoretical Term / ConceptDefinition / ExplanationSignificance in CRT
Race ConsciousnessAwareness of how race and racial identity shape social, political, and legal experiences.Central epistemological tool in CRT; challenges the myth of color-blindness.
Color-BlindnessThe idea that the law should treat individuals without regard to race.Critiqued for ignoring structural racism and maintaining white norms (Minda, p. 168–171).
MeritocracyA system in which advancement is based solely on ability or talent.Viewed as a cultural norm that favors white standards and masks inequality (p. 171).
Voice of ColorThe belief that people of color have unique insights due to their experiences with racism.Justifies storytelling as legal method; validates experiential knowledge (p. 173).
Narrative JurisprudenceThe use of stories, allegories, and personal experiences as legal scholarship.Challenges traditional objective legal writing and brings marginalized voices into legal analysis (p. 173).
Racial Distinctiveness ThesisThe claim that minority scholars bring a distinctive racial perspective to legal issues.Undermines assumptions of neutrality in legal academia (p. 172).
Segregated ScholarshipThe systemic exclusion of minority voices from mainstream legal scholarship.Exposed by scholars like Matsuda and Delgado (p. 172).
Postmodern NationalismCultural identity defined not by essentialism but by historical and social context.Promotes pluralism and multiculturalism in legal theory (p. 183–184).
IntersectionalityAnalysis of overlapping social identities, especially race and gender.Central to Black feminist legal critique (e.g., Anita Hill case) (p. 185).
Interest-Convergence ThesisThe idea that racial justice advances only when it aligns with the interests of whites (Derrick Bell).Used to critique the motivations behind landmark decisions like Brown v. Board (p. 171).
Perpetrator vs. Victim PerspectiveFramework by Alan Freeman distinguishing legal views centered on discriminatory intent vs. effects.CRT favors the victim perspective rooted in lived experience (p. 175).
DeconstructionA poststructuralist method (from Derrida) used to reveal contradictions in legal and racial categories.Employed by Crenshaw to expose racial binaries in law (p. 180–181).
HegemonyGramsci’s concept of dominance maintained through cultural norms and consent.Explains internalized racial hierarchies and dominant legal ideologies (p. 181).
Multivocality of RaceRecognition that racial identity is diverse, fluid, and context-dependent.Counters essentialist and binary racial thinking (p. 184).
Identity PoliticsPolitical positions based on the interests and perspectives of social groups with which people identify.Used to advocate for group-based legal recognition and critique legal universalism (p. 179).
“Critique of the Critique”CRT’s challenge to Critical Legal Studies (CLS) for ignoring racial realities.Highlights limitations of CLS’s race-neutral leftist critiques (p. 174–176).
Contribution of “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda to Literary Theory/Theories

🔹 1. Postmodernism

  • Undermines Legal Universalism: Minda explains that CRT “rejects the notio[n] that law can be studied in a way that is culturally neutral” (p. 183), aligning with postmodern critiques of objectivity and emphasizing cultural contingency.
  • Multiplicity of Truths: Postmodern theory holds that truth is fragmented; CRT follows suit by asserting that “truth is somewhere, if anywhere, in the symphony of experience” (p. 176).
  • Destabilizes Modernist Subjectivity: CRT “decenters the legal conception of race by revealing the different experiences of racial groups” (p. 184), echoing postmodernism’s critique of stable identity categories.

🔹 2. Narrative Theory

  • Rise of “Narrative Jurisprudence”: Minda states that CRT incorporates “rich allegories, metaphors, chronicles, and parables” to express racial experiences (p. 173).
  • Voice as Epistemology: CRT uses narrative not just as illustration, but as a mode of knowing, thereby expanding literary theory’s focus on the role of voice and authorship in meaning-making.
  • Minority Storytelling as Counter-History: The emphasis on experiential narrative challenges the canonical “legal story,” paralleling literary theory’s turn to subaltern and counter-discourses.

🔹 3. Identity Theory / Cultural Studies

  • Race as Social Construction: Minda writes that CRT “analyzes modern modes of jurisprudence as an ideology structured by racial attitudes and norms” (p. 179), contributing to cultural theory’s treatment of identity as constructed and performative.
  • Postmodern Nationalism: The concept critiques essentialist identity but retains group-based cultural specificity (p. 183), mirroring Stuart Hall’s notion of cultural identity as a ‘production’.
  • Intersectionality as Multivocality: CRT advances multi-positional identity politics, especially via black feminism’s challenge to “single-axis” narratives (p. 185).

🔹 4. Feminist Literary Theory

  • Shared Methodologies: Like feminist scholars, CRT uses narrative to foreground embodied, gendered, and racial experience (p. 173).
  • Intersectionality (Crenshaw): The Anita Hill case illustrates how “black feminist legal scholars” must “develop their own narratives” due to marginalization by both race and gender discourses (p. 185).
  • Critique of Essentialism: Echoing poststructuralist feminism, CRT warns against unitary concepts of identity, stating there is “no essential concept of race, culture, or group identity” (p. 183).

🔹 5. Deconstruction (Jacques Derrida)

  • Binary Opposition in Racial Ideology: Crenshaw uses deconstruction to critique the “metaphysics of presence” in racial thought—e.g., white = intelligent/moral vs. black = ignorant/immoral (p. 180).
  • Inversion of Binaries: CRT reveals how law “reproduces” hierarchies via binary oppositions and seeks to invert and destabilize these (p. 181).
  • Discourse and Power: The text shows how racial identities are “filled with meaning” through language and societal categorization (p. 180), echoing Derrida’s view that meaning is always deferred and constructed through difference.

🔹 6. Reader-Response Theory

  • Emphasis on Interpretation by Marginalized Readers: CRT contributes to reader-oriented criticism by suggesting that those who “experience discrimination speak with a special voice” (p. 173).
  • Reader Positionality Matters: The reception and interpretation of legal (and literary) texts depend on one’s social and racial location—questioning the “universal reader” assumption in traditional theory.

Examples of Critiques Through “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda
Literary WorkCRT Focus (Based on Minda)Critical Race Theory AnalysisKey Reference from Minda
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper LeePerpetrator vs. Victim PerspectiveThe legal system’s focus on Tom Robinson’s guilt ignores structural racism; reflects the “perpetrator perspective” that “blames the victim” for societal inequality.“The official perpetrator perspective… was unable to account for the experience of inequality from the ‘victim’s’ perspective.” (p. 175)
The Bluest Eye by Toni MorrisonRacial Identity and Internalized OppressionPecola’s desire for blue eyes symbolizes how racial identity is constructed by white norms, aligning with CRT’s focus on race consciousness as identity politics.“Color of skin pigmentation is viewed… as a symbol of cultural and personal identity constructed by white society.” (p. 168)
Heart of Darkness by Joseph ConradRace as the “Other” / Racial HierarchyAfrica is presented as the racialized “dark continent,” reinforcing colonial binary hierarchies. CRT critiques the construction of the Black ‘other’ in literature.“Racist ideology reproduces Derridian dichotomies… associating white with superiority and black with inferiority.” (p. 180)
The Great Gatsby by F. Scott FitzgeraldWhite Normativity and Cultural MythThe American Dream operates under white cultural codes, excluding minorities. CRT exposes how race is invisible but structurally centered in class and privilege.“Race discrimination is understood… as an ideology that legitimates the privileged status of white society.” (p. 181)
Criticism Against “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda

🔹 Criticisms from Conservative Scholars

  • Color-Blind Idealism:
    Critics like Thomas Sowell argue that CRT undermines the ideal of a color-blind society, claiming the “battle for civil rights was fought and won”, making continued race-conscious remedies like affirmative action unnecessary (p. 170).
  • Meritocratic Backlash:
    Opponents claim CRT rejects merit-based standards and instead promotes racial favoritism, thus politicizing civil rights and turning them into special-interest lobbying (p. 170–171).

🔹 Criticism by Randall Kennedy (Harvard Law) – “Racial Critiques Debate”

  • Race-Based Standing as Anti-Intellectual:
    Kennedy contended that CRT’s idea of “voice of color” and race-based intellectual standing is dangerous, reducing scholarship to racial identity rather than the merit of ideas (p. 175–176).
  • Silencing White Scholars:
    He argued that CRT may discourage or exclude white scholars from race discourse, fearing they lack the “authentic voice” needed to contribute (p. 176).
  • Racial Essentialism:
    Kennedy cautioned that CRT risks reinforcing essentialist racial categories, leading to judgments based on identity rather than content (p. 176).

🔹 Critique from Within: Critical Legal Studies (CLS) Movement

  • Failure to Ground in Historical Context:
    Kimberlé Crenshaw critiqued Alan Freeman and CLS scholars for failing to embed racial analysis in the historical and cultural reality of racial oppression (p. 174–175).
  • Undermining Liberal Rights Discourse:
    Crenshaw warned that CLS’s general attack on rights could disempower minorities, who still see rights discourse as essential for achieving transformation (p. 174).

🔹 Concerns About Identity Politics and Fragmentation

  • Balkanization of Discourse:
    Some critics fear CRT’s emphasis on identity-based scholarship can lead to fragmentation and the erosion of shared norms or standards in academia (p. 181–182).
  • Race Narratives vs. Universal Standards:
    There’s concern that personal narratives, though valuable, may lack rigor or universal applicability, challenging the idea of shared truth or objective legal reasoning (p. 173–174).

🔹 Feminist Parallels and Intersectionality Tensions

  • Internal Conflicts on Standpoint and Difference:
    CRT faces the same “sameness vs. difference” tensions as feminist legal theory—whether race should be foundational in all legal analysis or contextual and intersectional (p. 177–178).
  • Black Feminist Critique:
    Black feminist scholars noted CRT often marginalized gender, requiring the development of intersectional perspectives (e.g., Anita Hill vs. Clarence Thomas case) to reflect multiple identities (p. 184–185).

Representative Quotations from “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda with Explanation
QuotationExplanation
1. “Critical race theorists asserted that it was time for ‘different and blacker voices [to] speak new words and remake old legal doctrines.’”Highlights CRT’s aim to reframe legal discourse by centering the lived experiences and epistemologies of Black scholars, rejecting traditional white-dominated legal narratives.
2. “Race consciousness characterizes the jurisprudentiaI perspective of minority scholars who emphasize the need for fundamental changes in the way the law constructs knowledge about race.”Shows how CRT challenges the supposedly ‘neutral’ construction of race in law, advocating instead for race-conscious legal reform grounded in minority experiences.
3. “The law’s generalization of the category of race suppresses knowledge about the different cultural experiences and attitudes of racial groups.”Critiques legal essentialism and color-blind ideologies, calling for nuanced recognition of cultural and racial diversity in legal reasoning.
4. “Color-blind meritocratic standards…accord whites and Blacks the same formal rights and process” but fail to address structural inequities.Questions the fairness of formal equality when systemic racism persists; emphasizes that equal legal rights don’t guarantee equitable outcomes.
5. “The civil rights movement and its ringing imperative, ‘We Shall Overcome,’ must be seen as part of the American racial fantasy.”Derrick Bell’s critique of liberal civil rights law: symbolic victories obscure persistent inequality and discourage deeper structural change.
6. “Those who are oppressed in the present world can speak most eloquently of a better one.”Mari Matsuda’s claim that the oppressed offer unique normative insights and moral authority, advocating for their voices to lead legal critique and reform.
7. “Race narratives are offered to reveal the missing race consciousness of legal and social thought.”Demonstrates CRT’s use of storytelling to challenge dominant legal epistemologies and inject marginalized perspectives into jurisprudence.
8. “Freeman’s categories also failed to explain the racial backlash…resulting from race-specific affirmative action remedies.”Crenshaw critiques the CLS model for ignoring the historical and ideological roots of racism, and for inadequately addressing contemporary racial dynamics.
9. “The principal error of the CLS critique of liberal ideology is that CLS assumes that ideologically induced consent is the source of all forms of domination and oppression.”CRT expands beyond CLS by identifying racism—not just ideology—as a distinct and powerful form of domination requiring specific analysis.
10. “Race is multivocal and must be understood within the intersections of power relations of a multicultural and racially diverse culture.”Emphasizes the intersectional and postmodern dimensions of CRT, advocating for complex, context-sensitive understandings of racial identity and justice.
Suggested Readings: “Critical Race Theory” by Gary Minda
  1. Tierra, Daniela S. “” Think of the children!”: understanding parental and community opposition to critical race theory.” (2023).
  2. Minda, Gary. “Critical Race Theory.” Postmodern Legal Movements: Law and Jurisprudence At Century’s End, NYU Press, 1995, pp. 167–86. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qg2gf.14. Accessed 22 Mar. 2025.
  3. Sagers, Christopher L. Michigan Law Review, vol. 95, no. 6, 1997, pp. 1927–43. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1290030. Accessed 22 Mar. 2025.
  4. Prendergast, Catherine. “Race: The Absent Presence in Composition Studies.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 50, no. 1, 1998, pp. 36–53. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/358351. Accessed 22 Mar. 2025.
  5. Alfieri, Anthony V. “Retrying Race.” Michigan Law Review, vol. 101, no. 5, 2003, pp. 1141–200. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3595373. Accessed 22 Mar. 2025.

“Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum: Summary and Critique

“Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum first appeared in Studies in Philosophy and Education in 2002.

"Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t" by Lawrence Blum: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum

“Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum first appeared in Studies in Philosophy and Education in 2002. In this seminal work, Blum critiques the overuse and conceptual inflation of the terms ‘racism’ and ‘racist,’ arguing that their broad application has diluted their meaning and hindered productive discussions about racial issues. He proposes a more precise moral vocabulary to differentiate racial insensitivity, racial ignorance, and racial injustice from what he defines as two core forms of racism: antipathy racism (hostility or hatred toward a racial group) and inferiorizing racism (treating a racial group as inherently lesser). By distinguishing these forms, Blum contends that not all racially problematic actions stem from a racist motive, nor should all racial stereotypes be classified as racist. His work is crucial in literary theory and philosophical discourse as it refines the language used to discuss race, aiming to foster more nuanced and constructive interracial dialogue. Blum’s approach challenges the binary “racism or nothing” framework and encourages a more careful examination of racial issues, ultimately promoting a deeper and clearer moral engagement with race-related social problems.

Summary of “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum

1. Overuse and Conceptual Inflation of the Term “Racism”

  • Blum argues that the term “racism” is frequently overused, leading to a loss of its distinct moral force.
  • He states, “Instead of the current practice of referring to virtually anything that goes wrong or amiss with respect to race as ‘racism,’ we should recognize a much broader moral vocabulary” (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
  • He advocates for alternative terms such as racial insensitivity, racial ignorance, racial injustice, racial discomfort, and racial exclusion to more accurately describe different racial ills.

2. Defining Racism: Antipathy and Inferiorizing Racism

  • Blum defines racism as consisting of two distinct forms:
    • Antipathy Racism: Hostility or hatred toward a racial group.
    • Inferiorizing Racism: Treating a racial group as inferior or less valuable.
  • He clarifies, “All forms of racism can be related to either of two general ‘themes’ – inferiorization, and antipathy” (Blum, 2002, p. 210).

3. Distinction Between Racist Actions and Racially Objectionable Actions

  • Not all racial issues stem from racism, and not all racially insensitive acts are motivated by racist intent.
  • Blum warns against the oversimplification of racial incidents: “If our only choices are to label an act ‘racist’ or ‘nothing to get too upset about,’ those who seek to garner moral attention to some racial malfeasance will be tempted to call it ‘racist’” (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
  • He gives the example of a white police officer placing a noose as a prank, which may not be racist in intent but still has racial significance.

4. Racial Stereotypes: Not All Are Racist

  • Blum distinguishes between racist and non-racist racial stereotypes.
    • Example: The stereotype that “blacks are intellectually deficient” is racist because it inferiorizes them.
    • However, the stereotype that “blacks are good dancers” is not necessarily racist, although it is still problematic (Blum, 2002, p. 212).
  • He argues for a historical approach to understanding racial stereotypes, emphasizing that some have deeper, more harmful implications than others.

5. Racist Jokes vs. Racist Individuals

  • A person who tells a racist joke is not necessarily a racist.
  • He writes, “A remark can be unquestionably racist without the person making the remark being a racist, or making the remark for a racist reason” (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
  • He highlights that some individuals may tell racist jokes out of ignorance or a desire to fit in rather than due to racist beliefs.

6. Racial Discomfort and Anxiety Are Not Racism

  • Many white individuals experience racial discomfort when interacting with people of color, but this is not inherently racist.
  • Example: A white teacher who is uneasy talking to Black parents is not racist but has racial anxiety, which still affects her effectiveness as an educator (Blum, 2002, p. 213).
  • Blum asserts that racial anxiety stems from a lack of exposure, not necessarily racist ideology.

7. The Dangers of Racial Profiling and Stereotyping

  • Blum examines the case of Officer Cornel Young Jr., a Black police officer shot by white colleagues who mistook him for a threat.
  • He argues that the shooting was not motivated by racial hatred but by implicit racial biases: “Treating blackness as if it were an indicator of suspiciousness or criminality is referred to as ‘racial profiling’” (Blum, 2002, p. 216).
  • This highlights how racist stereotypes can be dangerous even when there is no explicit racial hatred.

8. The Importance of Clarifying the Meaning of Racism

  • Blum stresses that defining racism more precisely will improve interracial discussions and reduce unnecessary accusations of racism.
  • He states, “Fixing on such a definition should encourage us to make use of the considerable other resources our language affords us for describing and evaluating race-related ills” (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
  • He calls for a distinction between racism and other racial issues, so that society can address all race-related problems without diminishing the seriousness of racism.

Conclusion

  • Blum emphasizes that while racism is a significant moral failing, not all racial problems should be categorized as racism.
  • He calls for a broader and more precise moral vocabulary to discuss race-related issues without diluting the meaning of racism.
  • Ultimately, he argues that “Moral concern is appropriately directed toward this wider domain, and should not be confined to racism appropriately so called” (Blum, 2002, p. 218).
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum
Theoretical Term/ConceptDefinition/Explanation
Antipathy RacismHatred or strong hostility toward a racial group (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
Inferiorizing RacismViewing or treating a racial group as inferior or of lesser value (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
Conceptual InflationThe excessive and indiscriminate use of the term “racism” to describe all racial issues, weakening its moral force (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
Racial InsensitivityFailure to acknowledge racial differences in a way that respects the experiences of different racial groups (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
Racial IgnoranceLack of knowledge or awareness about different racial groups and their histories (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
Racial InjusticeSocial or systemic unfair treatment of racial groups that perpetuates inequality (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
Racial Discomfort/AnxietyUncertainty, unease, or discomfort when interacting with people of different racial groups, even in the absence of racial hostility (Blum, 2002, p. 213).
Racial ExclusionThe marginalization or exclusion of certain racial groups from social, economic, or political participation (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
Racial HomogenizationThe tendency to treat all members of a racial group as identical or sharing the same characteristics, ignoring individual differences (Blum, 2002, p. 215).
Racial ProfilingThe association of race with criminality or suspicion, leading to disproportionate law enforcement actions against certain racial groups (Blum, 2002, p. 216).
Racist JokesJokes that make fun of or demean racial groups, even when the teller may not personally hold racist beliefs (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
Racist StereotypesGeneralizations about racial groups, some of which are explicitly racist (e.g., stereotypes about intellectual inferiority), while others may be less harmful but still problematic (Blum, 2002, p. 212).
Moral OverloadThe burden placed on the term “racism” when it is used to describe all racial problems, leading to a dilution of its significance (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
Locational Aspect of RacismThe idea that racism can be found in different entities such as individuals, actions, institutions, jokes, or policies, and that its severity depends on the context (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
Contribution of “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Critical Race Theory (CRT)

  • Blum’s work aligns with Critical Race Theory (CRT) by exploring how racism is deeply embedded in social structures and language.
  • His argument that racism is often misapplied and overused mirrors CRT’s concern with how race is socially constructed and manipulated for power dynamics.
  • He critiques the tendency to label all racial issues as “racism,” emphasizing, “Not all racial incidents are racist incidents. Not every instance of racial conflict, insensitivity, discomfort, miscommunication, exclusion, injustice, or ignorance should be called ‘racist’” (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
  • This perspective refines CRT’s analytical tools, urging scholars to distinguish between different racial phenomena rather than using a single, broad framework.

2. Postcolonial Theory

  • Blum’s emphasis on inferiorizing racism contributes to Postcolonial Theory, particularly regarding how colonized subjects are historically perceived as inferior.
  • His distinction between antipathy racism (racial hatred) and inferiorizing racism (racial hierarchy) mirrors postcolonial critiques of Eurocentrism and its legacy.
  • “All forms of racism can be related to either of two general ‘themes’ – inferiorization, and antipathy” (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
  • This distinction helps in postcolonial literary analysis by differentiating between racial domination through hate (as seen in colonial violence) and racial paternalism (as seen in so-called ‘benevolent’ colonial rule).

3. Structuralism and Semiotics

  • Blum’s work contributes to Structuralist and Semiotic Literary Theory by analyzing how language and terminology shape racial discourse.
  • He argues that the word “racism” has become overloaded with moral and political meaning, diluting its analytical clarity, which aligns with structuralist concerns about language instability.
  • “The words ‘racism’ and ‘racist’ have become deeply entrenched in the moral vocabulary of the United States and Western Europe” (Blum, 2002, p. 205).
  • This insight is relevant for semiotic studies, as it suggests that racial discourse is shaped by shifting linguistic meanings rather than fixed realities.

4. Reader-Response Theory

  • Blum’s discussion of racial discomfort and anxiety contributes to Reader-Response Theory, particularly regarding how audiences interpret racialized texts.
  • He argues that not all racial unease is due to racism, stating, “Racial discomfort is quite common… but it is not, in itself, racist” (Blum, 2002, p. 213).
  • This aligns with Stanley Fish’s notion of interpretive communities, where racial interpretation varies depending on cultural context and personal experience.
  • It highlights that literature containing racial themes may be interpreted differently depending on the racial awareness and biases of the reader.

5. New Historicism

  • Blum’s emphasis on historical context in defining racism supports New Historicism, which argues that texts must be understood within their historical and cultural conditions.
  • He stresses that racial stereotypes must be evaluated in both their historical and contemporary significance, writing, “Stereotypes must be viewed historically as well as contemporarily, and a given stereotype’s resonance with a much more distinctly racist stereotype renders it objectionable” (Blum, 2002, p. 212).
  • This reinforces New Historicist approaches that contextualize literary depictions of race within broader historical power structures.

6. Ethical Criticism

  • Blum’s moral argument about the overuse of racism as a term contributes to Ethical Criticism, which evaluates literature based on its moral implications.
  • He argues that if all racial issues are labeled as “racist,” moral accountability is lost, stating, “The burden placed on the term ‘racism’ when it is used to describe all racial problems leads to a dilution of its significance” (Blum, 2002, p. 209).
  • This aligns with ethical critics like Martha Nussbaum, who emphasize precision in moral critique within literature.

7. Intersectionality in Feminist Theory

  • Blum’s broadening of racial discourse beyond black/white binaries contributes to Intersectionality Theory, which examines race, gender, and class together.
  • He highlights how Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian-Americans are often excluded from race discussions, stating, “Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian-Americans may not be certain how to insert themselves into a discourse which seems to them dominated by ‘black/white’ issues” (Blum, 2002, p. 204).
  • This aligns with Kimberlé Crenshaw’s intersectional critique of race and gender as multifaceted rather than monolithic.
Examples of Critiques Through “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum
Literary WorkCritique Through Blum’s Framework
To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper LeeBlum’s concept of “Conceptual Inflation” applies to how racism is framed in the novel. The story centers on Atticus Finch as a “white savior,” reinforcing an inferiorizing view of Black people by making them passive recipients of justice rather than active agents. The novel also highlights legal injustice but does not deeply explore systemic racism (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
Heart of Darkness by Joseph ConradBlum’s distinction between “Inferiorizing Racism” and “Antipathy Racism” helps critique Conrad’s depiction of African characters. While the novel does not explicitly express racial hatred (antipathy racism), it portrays Africans as uncivilized and dehumanized, lacking agency, which aligns with colonial inferiorizing racism (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
Othello by William ShakespeareOthello can be analyzed through Blum’s idea of “Racial Anxiety” rather than outright racism. While characters like Iago express racial hatred, Othello himself experiences racial discomfort and internalized racism, as he struggles with his identity and societal perception in Venetian society (Blum, 2002, p. 213). This highlights how racism’s impact can extend beyond direct hostility to include internalized oppression.
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark TwainUsing Blum’s concepts of “Racial Profiling” and “Racial Stereotypes,” the novel’s depiction of Jim as superstitious and submissive reinforces problematic racial tropes. However, Twain critiques racism through satire, exposing racial injustice and the absurdity of racial stereotypes, making the novel more nuanced in its racial discourse (Blum, 2002, p. 216).
Criticism Against “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum

1. Oversimplification of Racism’s Structural Nature

  • Some scholars argue that Blum’s focus on individual acts of racism (antipathy and inferiorizing racism) does not fully address structural and institutional racism.
  • Critics from Critical Race Theory (CRT) contend that racism is deeply embedded in legal, economic, and political institutions, not just in individual attitudes (Blum, 2002, p. 210).
  • Blum’s emphasis on distinguishing racial issues from racism might distract from systemic oppression and racial inequalities.

2. Risks of Downplaying Everyday Racism

  • By advocating for a more nuanced moral vocabulary (racial insensitivity, racial ignorance, racial anxiety, etc.), some argue that Blum risks minimizing the harm of “less severe” racial issues (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
  • Critics worry that distinguishing racism from other racial problems might allow individuals and institutions to dismiss discriminatory actions as merely “insensitive” or “ignorant” rather than truly harmful.
  • This critique aligns with Toni Morrison’s idea that subtle, everyday racism can be just as damaging as overt racism.

3. Conceptual Inflation vs. Linguistic Evolution

  • Blum critiques “conceptual inflation”, arguing that overusing “racism” weakens its moral force (Blum, 2002, p. 207).
  • However, linguists and sociologists counter that language evolves to reflect new social realities, and broader applications of racism (such as microaggressions and systemic biases) are necessary to describe contemporary racial dynamics.
  • Scholars like Ibram X. Kendi argue that racism should be recognized wherever racial disparities exist, rather than limited to historical definitions.

4. Limited Engagement with Intersectionality

  • Blum’s work primarily focuses on race as an isolated category but does not deeply engage with intersectionality, the idea that race intersects with gender, class, sexuality, and disability.
  • Kimberlé Crenshaw’s Intersectionality Theory criticizes frameworks that examine race without considering how multiple systems of oppression interact.
  • For example, Black women experience racism and sexism simultaneously, but Blum does not fully address how these forms of discrimination overlap.

5. Eurocentric and U.S.-Centered Perspective

  • Blum’s analysis of racism is largely based on U.S. racial history and Western moral philosophy (Blum, 2002, p. 203).
  • Some critics argue that his framework does not sufficiently account for racial dynamics in non-Western contexts, such as caste-based discrimination in India or ethnic tensions in Africa.
  • Postcolonial theorists argue that racism must be examined globally, beyond U.S. legal and social structures.

6. The Practicality of His Distinctions

  • While Blum’s nuanced definitions are useful for academic discussions, critics question whether they are practical in real-world applications.
  • Activists argue that insisting on differentiating “racial insensitivity” from “racism” could complicate anti-racist efforts and lead to unnecessary debates rather than action.
  • Angela Davis and other anti-racist activists emphasize that naming and challenging racism directly is more important than philosophically debating definitions.
Representative Quotations from “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum with Explanation
QuotationExplanation
“The words ‘racist’ and ‘racism’ have become so overused that they now constitute obstacles to understanding and interracial dialogue about racial matters.” (Blum, 2002, p. 203)Blum argues that the excessive use of “racist” and “racism” dilutes their meaning, making discussions about race less productive. He calls for a more precise vocabulary to describe different racial issues.
“Not all racial incidents are racist incidents.” (Blum, 2002, p. 207)He differentiates between racial issues such as insensitivity, ignorance, and injustice versus explicit racism, suggesting that labeling every racial problem as “racist” is counterproductive.
“We should fix on a definition of ‘racism’ that is continuous with its historical usage, and avoids conceptual inflation.” (Blum, 2002, p. 204)Blum emphasizes that the definition of racism should remain grounded in historical contexts of oppression, rather than being applied loosely to all negative racial experiences.
“Inferiorizing is treating the racial other as inferior or of lesser value and, secondarily, viewing the racial other as inferior.” (Blum, 2002, p. 210)He introduces “inferiorizing racism”, explaining that it involves both attitudes and behaviors that depict a racial group as less valuable or worthy.
“Antipathy racism is simply a strong dislike, often tinged with hostility, toward individuals or groups because of their race.” (Blum, 2002, p. 211)He contrasts antipathy racism (hate-based racism) with inferiorizing racism, acknowledging that racial animosity exists even without superiority claims.
“The paternalistic inferiorizing racist often hates those members of the racial group who do not accept the inferior social position he regards as appropriate to their inferior natures.” (Blum, 2002, p. 211)He discusses historical paternalistic racism, where dominant groups justify oppression by portraying themselves as “benevolent” rulers.
“Racial anxiety is quite common in the United States, especially, I believe, among whites, although it can be found in any racial group.” (Blum, 2002, p. 213)Blum introduces “racial anxiety”, explaining that discomfort around racial issues is often misinterpreted as racism, even though it stems from ignorance or fear rather than hostility.
“It is bad to tell a racist joke, whether one means to offend, or holds racist attitudes, or not.” (Blum, 2002, p. 209)He challenges intent-based defenses of racism, asserting that harm exists regardless of intent when racist jokes or comments reinforce stereotypes.
“The stereotype of blacks as good dancers is not racist, on my account. It attributes a positive rather than a negative quality.” (Blum, 2002, p. 212)He critiques broad applications of the term “racist”, arguing that while stereotypes are harmful, not all racial stereotypes necessarily denote racism.
“We must recognize that ‘racism’ by no means captures all of what can go wrong in the domain of race.” (Blum, 2002, p. 218)Blum calls for a nuanced moral vocabulary to address racial insensitivity, exclusion, and structural inequalities without over-relying on the term “racism.”
Suggested Readings: “Racism: What It Is And What It Isn’t” by Lawrence Blum
  1. Blum, Lawrence. “Racism: What it is and what it isn’t.” Studies in Philosophy and Education 21.3 (2002): 203-218.
  2. Ikuenobe, Polycarp. “The Practical and Experiential Reality of Racism: Carter’s and Corlett’s Realism About Race and Racism.” Journal of African American Studies, vol. 22, no. 4, 2018, pp. 373–92. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/45200269. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.
  3. Basu, Rima. “The Wrongs of Racist Beliefs.” Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, vol. 176, no. 9, 2019, pp. 2497–515. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/45211663Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.

“Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse: Summary and Critique

“Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse first appeared in Nations and Nationalism 1(2) in 1995, spanning pages 163–173.

"Racism and Nationalism" by George L. Mosse: Summary and Critique
Introduction: “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse

“Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse first appeared in Nations and Nationalism 1(2) in 1995, spanning pages 163–173. The article explores the complex relationship between nationalism and racism in modern history, emphasizing that while nationalism could exist independently of racism, their alliance in the late 19th and early 20th centuries made racism more operational and politically potent. Mosse defines racism as a distinct and total ideology, centered on the human body as both a symbol and a means of exclusion. He argues that racism functioned as a civic religion, shaping social hierarchies through myths, symbols, and aesthetic ideals derived from anthropology, history, and classical imagery. The essay highlights how nationalism, as a flexible and widely adaptable ideology, absorbed elements of racism, particularly in its more extreme, integral forms. However, Mosse insists that nationalism was not inherently racist and could resist racial exclusivity, distinguishing between nationalist patriotism and the racist drive for purity and dominance. His work remains influential in literary theory and historical studies by illustrating how racist ideology constructs rigid, totalizing worldviews, often through visual and symbolic representations of the ideal and the counter-type. Through this lens, Mosse contributes to a broader discourse on the dangers of conflating national identity with racial hierarchies, offering insights relevant to both historical analysis and contemporary debates on identity politics and exclusion.

Summary of “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse

Main Ideas:

  • Distinction Between Racism and Nationalism:
    • Racism and nationalism are often linked, but nationalism is a flexible ideology that can exist without racism. However, when the two align, “nationalism made racism a reality, and racism came to dominate nationalism” (Mosse, 1995, p. 163).
  • Racism as an Ideology and a Totality:
    • Racism is a distinct, self-sustaining ideology that “encompasses the whole human personality—its looks, behavior, and intellect” (p. 164).
    • It is a “worldview as complete as other ideologies which evolved during the nineteenth century, such as socialism or conservatism” (p. 165).
  • The Role of Aesthetics and Anthropology in Racism:
    • Racism was reinforced by scientific disciplines such as anthropology, history, and physiognomy, creating rigid standards of human appearance and superiority. “Anthropology, history, and this new aesthetic consciousness were all concerned with the search for roots, they could fulfill a longing for immutability and certainty in a world of rapid social change” (p. 164).
  • The Symbolism of the Human Body in Racism:
    • Unlike nationalism, which relied on abstract symbols like flags or anthems, racism used “the human body itself as its most potent symbol” (p. 163).
    • Racial aesthetics borrowed heavily from classical Greek ideals, where “harmony, proportion, and ‘quiet greatness’ were seen as the ultimate expressions of racial superiority” (p. 166).
  • Racism’s Need for a Counter-Type:
    • Racism constructs an “ideal type” and a “counter-type” (p. 169).
    • The racial enemy, whether Jews, Blacks, or other marginalized groups, was depicted as the antithesis of the racial ideal. “Through the counter-image, we obtain the greatest clarity of what our own ideals should be” (p. 171).
  • Gender and Racism:
    • Racism was deeply gendered, with the male body serving as the primary symbol of racial superiority. “Masculinity symbolized the active life, the hope for the victory of the race over its enemies and the subsequent construction of the ideal racist society” (p. 167).
    • Women were depicted as either mothers of the race or the nation, reinforcing strict gender roles (p. 167).
  • The Political Implications of Racism and Nationalism:
    • Nationalism is flexible and has been linked with various ideologies (liberalism, conservatism, socialism), while racism is an “uncompromising worldview that does not tolerate ambiguity” (p. 165).
    • The alliance between nationalism and racism often led to extreme political movements, most notably in Nazi Germany: “Racism was the catalyst which pushed German nationalism over the edge, from discrimination to mass extermination” (p. 171).
  • Racism as a Civic Religion:
    • Racism functioned as a “civic religion” with its own myths, symbols, and rituals (p. 165).
    • It promised “immutability and redemption, much like traditional religious belief” (p. 165).
  • The Danger of Trivializing Racism:
    • The contemporary misuse of the term “racism” dilutes its historical significance. “A tendency to trivialize racism has been much more common; to make use of the term in contemporary polemics in order to designate all those acts which create or maintain disadvantage” (p. 164).
  • Conclusion: Nationalism Can Resist Racism:
    • While nationalism has historically aligned with racism, it does not have to be racist. “Coming to understand the relationship between racism and nationalism should lead us to build upon the fact that nationalism, as patriotism, always managed to resist the racist temptation” (p. 173).

Key Takeaways:

  • Racism is a rigid, totalizing ideology, while nationalism is more flexible.
  • The human body serves as the primary symbol in racist ideology, reinforcing stereotypes of superiority and inferiority.
  • Racism constructs a “counter-type” as a necessary enemy to its racial ideal.
  • While nationalism and racism have often merged, nationalism is not inherently racist and has alternative, more inclusive traditions.
  • Understanding the distinction between the two is essential to resisting racism’s influence in nationalist movements.
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse
Term/ConceptDefinition/ExplanationReference from the Article
Racism as a Total IdeologyRacism is a complete worldview, shaping identity through biological, cultural, and aesthetic markers.“Racism is a totality. It encompasses the whole human personality—its looks, behavior, and intellect” (Mosse, 1995, p. 164).
Nationalism’s FlexibilityNationalism can adapt to different political ideologies, including liberalism, conservatism, and socialism, making it distinct from racism.“Nationalism was by far the more flexible ideology, making alliances with almost every political or social movement” (p. 165).
Human Body as a SymbolRacism is distinguished from nationalism in that it is visually focused, using the human body as a marker of racial identity.“The human body itself became the predominant racial symbol” (p. 165).
Ideal Type vs. Counter-TypeRacism constructs an ideal racial stereotype and contrasts it with an inferior “counter-type,” reinforcing racial hierarchies.“Racism centred upon the construction of stereotypes as living and familiar symbols” (p. 165).
Civic ReligionRacism functions as a belief system with rituals, myths, and symbols akin to a religious structure.“Racism can be called a civic religion, and like any system of religious belief it created its own world of myth and symbol” (p. 165).
Racial AestheticsRacist ideology borrows from classical ideals of beauty, especially Greek sculptures, to establish physical standards of superiority.“The rediscovery of Greek sculpture… set the tone, even if it was modified by subsequent taste” (p. 166).
Masculinity in RacismThe male body represents the ideal racial type, emphasizing physical strength, control, and virility, while women are relegated to reproductive roles.“Masculinity symbolized the active life, the hope for the victory of the race over its enemies” (p. 167).
Trivialization of RacismThe modern misuse of the term “racism” in political discourse dilutes its historical and ideological significance.“A tendency to trivialize racism has been much more common… to designate all those acts which create or maintain disadvantage” (p. 164).
Racism’s Need for an EnemyRacism depends on an enemy figure (Jews, Black populations, etc.) to define itself and justify exclusion and violence.“Racism depended upon the existence of its enemies, it had always defined itself as at war against hostile and inferior races” (p. 169).
Integral NationalismA form of nationalism that seeks absolute unity and often aligns with racism to define an exclusive national identity.“Without such a marriage [to nationalism], European racism would have remained impotent” (p. 165).
Symbolism in Racism and NationalismBoth ideologies rely on symbols to create identity, but while nationalism uses flags and anthems, racism uses physical stereotypes.“Nationalism could annex many of the ideas and the stereotype I have discussed because it too was based upon the principle of separateness” (p. 168).
Racism as a Revolutionary IdeologyRacism, rather than being purely reactionary, functions as a dynamic force advocating radical change.“Racism supported existing manners and morals and sought to eliminate the socially dangerous counter-type” (p. 172).
Contribution of “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse to Literary Theory/Theories

1. Postcolonial Theory

  • Influence on the Representation of the Other:
    • Mosse explores how racism constructs the “counter-type” as an enemy figure, a central concern in postcolonial studies.
    • “Racism depended upon the existence of its enemies, it had always defined itself as at war against hostile and inferior races” (Mosse, 1995, p. 169).
  • Racial Stereotyping and Colonial Discourse:
    • His analysis of bodily aesthetics in racial ideology parallels colonial narratives that portray the colonized as inferior based on physical features.
    • “The very construction of the human body, its size, sinews, muscles and bones, were made to bear witness to the superiority or inferiority of a race and its culture” (p. 165).

2. Structuralism and Semiotics

  • Symbolism in National and Racial Identity:
    • Mosse highlights how nationalism and racism use symbols to construct meaning, resonating with semiotic analyses of cultural narratives.
    • “Nationalism could annex many of the ideas and the stereotype I have discussed because it too was based upon the principle of separateness” (p. 168).
  • Binary Oppositions in Racial Ideology:
    • The racial “ideal type” versus “counter-type” functions as a binary structure akin to Levi-Strauss’s structuralist oppositions (e.g., civilized vs. uncivilized).
    • “Through the counter-image we obtain the greatest clarity of what our own ideals should be” (p. 171).

3. Feminist Literary Theory & Gender Studies

  • Masculinity as a National and Racial Ideal:
    • Mosse examines how racial ideology constructs masculinity as an active, dominant force while relegating women to reproductive roles.
    • “Masculinity symbolized the active life, the hope for the victory of the race over its enemies and the subsequent construction of the ideal racist society” (p. 167).
  • Gendered Nationalism and the Role of Women:
    • Women in nationalist discourse are depicted either as “mothers of the nation” or passive figures, reinforcing patriarchal ideals in literature and cultural narratives.
    • “Women as public symbols were either mothers of the family or mothers of the nation, such as Germania, Britannia or the sedate Marianne” (p. 167).

4. Psychoanalytic Literary Theory

  • Racial Stereotypes and Projection:
    • The racial counter-type functions as a projection of societal fears, similar to Freud’s theory of the “Other” as a repressed desire or anxiety.
    • “The racial myths are familiar enough, they concern the faraway origins, the hardships and triumphs of the race, leading to redemption when the race wars are won” (p. 165).
  • Racism as an Unconscious Collective Desire:
    • The need for absolute racial purity mirrors psychoanalytic anxieties about contamination, reflecting the superego’s imposition of rigid ideological purity.
    • “Racism leaves nothing to chance. Whether it legitimizes itself through science or through pseudo-historical scholarship, it does not tolerate what Ezra Pound once called an ‘Indeterminate Wobble’” (p. 165).

5. Critical Race Theory (CRT)

  • Racism as a Socially Constructed Ideology:
    • Mosse’s work supports CRT’s assertion that race is not biologically determined but a social construct shaped by historical narratives.
    • “Racism as a political slogan could lead to such absurdities as the United Nations first declaring that Zionism is racism, and then repealing this assertion, as if racism’s finality was not one of its chief and most fateful characteristics” (p. 164).
  • The Institutionalization of Racism Through Nationalism:
    • His analysis of how nationalism made racism operational aligns with CRT’s focus on systemic racism.
    • “Nationalism made racism a reality, and racism came to dominate nationalism once an alliance between the two movements had been consummated” (p. 163).

6. Cultural Studies & Identity Theory

  • The Construction of National Identity Through Aesthetic Ideals:
    • Mosse shows how national identity is shaped through visual and literary representations, influencing cultural studies’ analysis of media and literature.
    • “Anthropology, history, and this new aesthetic consciousness were all concerned with the search for roots, they could fulfill a longing for immutability and certainty in a world of rapid social change” (p. 164).
  • Populism and the Role of Nationalism in Culture:
    • His analysis of nationalist movements as populist forces informs cultural studies on how political ideologies manipulate cultural identity.
    • “The racist utopia was populist, it stood outside the present political system” (p. 172).
Examples of Critiques Through “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse
Author & WorkCritique Through Mosse’s LensKey Reference from Mosse (1995)
Joseph Conrad – Heart of Darkness– The novel reinforces racial hierarchies by depicting Africans as the “counter-type” in contrast to European civilization.
– Conrad’s portrayal aligns with Mosse’s argument that racism relies on bodily aesthetics to establish superiority and inferiority.
– The novel reflects colonial nationalism’s justification of imperialism as a civilizing mission.
“Racism depended upon the existence of its enemies, it had always defined itself as at war against hostile and inferior races” (p. 169).
Margaret Mitchell – Gone with the Wind– The novel romanticizes the Confederacy, reinforcing racial stereotypes that Mosse identifies as central to racist nationalism.
– The depiction of African Americans as passive or inferior supports the aesthetic and cultural markers of racial hierarchy.
– The nostalgia for the “Old South” mirrors Mosse’s discussion of nationalism’s tendency to mythologize history.
“Nationalism, even if it was tolerant and respected the culture of other nations, always contained elements which might lead to a greater exclusiveness” (p. 168).
Adolf Hitler – Mein Kampf– Mosse’s work directly critiques the racial ideology found in Mein Kampf, which constructs an “ideal type” (Aryan) and “counter-type” (Jews, Slavs, etc.).
– The book exemplifies Mosse’s argument that racism functions as a civic religion with myths, symbols, and calls for purification.
– Hitler’s ideas reflect the extremist nationalism that Mosse warns leads to the weaponization of racism.
“Nationalism made racism a reality, and racism came to dominate nationalism once an alliance between the two movements had been consummated” (p. 163).
Chinua Achebe – Things Fall Apart– Achebe’s novel subverts the racist nationalist narrative by presenting African society before European colonization.
– The book challenges Mosse’s observation that racism was often legitimized through anthropology by portraying Igbo customs as complex and structured.
– The colonial figures in the novel embody the “civilizing mission” that Mosse critiques as a justification for racial hierarchy.
“Racism used history, anthropology and aesthetic sensibilities in order to set a standard of human looks, beauty and behaviour” (p. 164).
Criticism Against “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse

1. Overemphasis on European Context

  • Mosse’s analysis is heavily Eurocentric, focusing primarily on racism and nationalism in Europe while neglecting parallel developments in colonial and postcolonial settings.
  • Critics argue that his framework does not fully account for non-Western experiences of racism and nationalism, such as in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

2. Underestimation of Economic Factors

  • Mosse emphasizes cultural and aesthetic elements of racism but does not sufficiently engage with economic motivations behind racist ideologies.
  • Some scholars argue that racism was not just about aesthetics and nationalism but was deeply tied to economic exploitation, capitalism, and colonial labor systems.

3. Lack of Intersectional Analysis

  • His work does not engage deeply with intersectionality, particularly how race interacts with class, gender, and sexuality.
  • While he discusses gendered aspects of nationalism, some feminist scholars believe his analysis lacks depth in examining how women of different races experienced racism differently.

4. Limited Discussion on Resistance and Counter-Narratives

  • The book focuses on how racism and nationalism became dominant ideologies but offers little analysis of anti-racist movements, resistance literature, or alternative nationalist movements that opposed racism.
  • Critics argue that he does not sufficiently discuss figures and movements that challenged racist nationalism from within their own national traditions.

5. Ambiguous Stance on Nationalism

  • Mosse acknowledges that nationalism does not necessarily have to be racist, but he does not provide a clear theoretical framework for distinguishing between inclusive and exclusive forms of nationalism.
  • Some critics argue that this ambiguity leaves room for misinterpretation and fails to fully address how nationalism can be reformed to resist racism.

6. Oversimplification of Racist Ideology

  • Some scholars believe Mosse portrays racism as a rigid and self-contained ideology without fully exploring its fluidity and adaptability in different historical and political contexts.
  • The book does not explore how contemporary forms of racism have evolved beyond 19th and 20th-century frameworks.

7. Insufficient Engagement with Contemporary Theories of Race

  • Since Mosse’s work was published in 1995, it does not engage with more recent developments in critical race theory, postcolonial theory, and decolonial studies.
  • Some scholars argue that his analysis, while insightful, does not incorporate more recent critiques of Eurocentrism and white supremacy in global contexts.

Representative Quotations from “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse with Explanation
QuotationExplanation
“Racism is a totality. It encompasses the whole human personality – its looks, behaviour and intellect.” (p. 164)Mosse argues that racism is not merely an act of discrimination but a comprehensive ideology that dictates social and political structures through rigid racial hierarchies.
“Racism used history, anthropology and aesthetic sensibilities in order to set a standard of human looks, beauty and behaviour.” (p. 164)This highlights how racist ideology legitimized itself using pseudo-scientific and aesthetic theories to establish racial superiority, reinforcing cultural stereotypes.
“Nationalism made racism a reality, and racism came to dominate nationalism once an alliance between the two movements had been consummated.” (p. 163)Mosse explains that nationalism and racism, though separate, became intertwined when nationalism sought to define itself through racial purity.
“Racism depended upon the existence of its enemies; it had always defined itself as at war against hostile and inferior races.” (p. 169)Racism requires a constructed ‘other’—a racial or ethnic enemy—against which superiority is asserted, often leading to exclusion or violence.
“The human body itself became the predominant racial symbol, and a great deal of racist literature was devoted to an explanation of how one could recognise on sight one’s own as against those of a different race.” (p. 165)This demonstrates the emphasis on physical appearance in racial ideology, where visual cues were used to define and reinforce racial distinctions.
“The racial myths are familiar enough; they concern the faraway origins, the hardships and triumphs of the race, leading to redemption when the race wars are won.” (p. 165)Mosse compares racism to a civic religion, showing how it creates myths and narratives that justify racial supremacy and conflict.
“Masculinity symbolized the active life, the hope for the victory of the race over its enemies and the subsequent construction of the ideal racist society.” (p. 167)Racism and nationalism often reinforce gender roles, with masculinity being linked to racial strength and the capacity for dominance.
“The difference between racism and nationalism is sometimes difficult to determine, because both work with almost the same ideal type, gender differences and separateness.” (p. 168)Nationalism and racism share structural similarities in their reliance on idealized identity types and exclusionary logic, making them susceptible to merging.
“Modern society needs an enemy as a foil who would serve to strengthen its self-image.” (p. 171)This statement critiques how societies use external and internal enemies to define and justify their political and ideological positions.
“Coming to understand the relationship between racism and nationalism should lead us to build upon the fact that nationalism, as patriotism, always managed to resist the racist temptation.” (p. 173)Mosse suggests that nationalism can exist without racism, and recognizing their distinction is essential to resisting racialized nationalist ideologies.
Suggested Readings: “Racism and Nationalism” by George L. Mosse
  1. Mosse, George L. “Racism and nationalism.” Nations and Nationalism 1.2 (1995): 163-173.
  2. Tortorice, John. “Bibliography of George L. Mosse.” German Politics & Society, vol. 18, no. 4 (57), 2000, pp. 58–92. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23737475. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.
  3. Mosse, George L., and Anthony J. Steinhoff. “Racism.” The Culture of Western Europe: The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, University of Wisconsin Press, 2023, pp. 97–112. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv30pnv5q.13. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.
  4. Moro, Renato. “George L. Mosse and Christian Religious Thought in Contemporary History.” Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 56, no. 4, 2021, pp. 896–930. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27199340. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.
  5. Cheng, Yinghong. “From Campus Racism to Cyber Racism: Discourse of Race and Chinese Nationalism.” The China Quarterly, no. 207, 2011, pp. 561–79. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41305257. Accessed 19 Mar. 2025.