“Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian

“Literary Theory’ Theory’ and Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian first appeared in Wenxue pinglun (Literary Review) in 2008 and was translated and republished in Frontiers of Literary Studies in China in 2010. This seminal article offers a comprehensive exploration of the evolution of literary studies in the 20th century’ distinguishing between “Theory of Literature” (or “Literary Theory”)’ “Theory'” and “Post-Theory” within their distinct historical and cultural paradigms. Zhou Xian examines the shifts from modern formalism to postmodern French Theory and the reflexivity of post-theory’ emphasizing the interplay of literary’ aesthetic’ and political discourses. One of the article’s key insights is its argument that’ “Literary theory was formed within the framework of modern humanities’ emphasizing linguistic and aesthetic aspects’ but has since transformed into a discipline shaped by political and interdisciplinary currents.” This work is crucial for understanding the transitions in literary theory and its broader implications for the humanities’ marking the tensions between disciplinary specialization and interdisciplinary convergence.

Summary of “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian

Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Context in the Article
Literary Theory	A study of the principles and criteria of literature’ distinct from literary criticism and literary history.	Emerged within modern humanities as part of disciplinary specialization’ focusing on linguistic and aesthetic aspects.
Theory	A broader interdisciplinary framework that moves beyond literature’ emphasizing politics’ identity’ and power dynamics.	Originates in the context of human sciences and is associated with “grand theories” such as French Theory.
Post-Theory	A phase after grand narratives’ characterized by reflexivity’ multiplicity’ and localized approaches to theoretical issues.	Critiques both the universalism of earlier theories and the reductionism of ideological approaches.
Modern Paradigm	A theoretical framework emphasizing formalism and aesthetic purity in literary studies.	Represented by Russian Formalism’ New Criticism’ and early structuralism.
Postmodern Paradigm	A framework that incorporates interdisciplinary methods and challenges universal aesthetic values.	Exemplified by French Theory’ including thinkers like Derrida’ Foucault’ and Lacan.
Politics of Theory	The integration of political ideologies into theoretical frameworks’ influencing the interpretation of literature and culture.	Dominates in post-1960s theories’ merging cultural and political struggles.
Reflexivity	The act of examining and critiquing the frameworks and assumptions underlying a discipline or methodology.	Central to post-theory’ encouraging self-awareness in theoretical practices.
Multiplicity	The rejection of universal truths in favor of diverse’ localized’ and context-specific interpretations.	Post-theory prioritizes this over grand narratives.
Linguistic Turn	A shift in focus from abstract literary principles to the role of language and discourse in shaping meaning.	Originated with structuralism and expanded into interdisciplinary studies of discourse.
Grand Theory	All-encompassing’ interdisciplinary frameworks aimed at explaining social’ cultural’ and literary phenomena.	Associated with figures like Derrida and Foucault; critiqued for its ambition to universalize theory.
Aesthetic Values	The intrinsic artistic and sensory qualities of literature’ emphasizing beauty and experience over ideology.	Advocated for by scholars like Sontag and Krieger in response to the over-politicization of literature.
Cultural Studies	An interdisciplinary approach focusing on everyday culture’ identity’ and power structures.	Critiqued in post-theory for sometimes trivializing literary studies.
Episteme	The underlying set of rules and structures that govern knowledge production within a given period.	Central to Foucault’s discourse analysis and the broader human sciences.
Interdisciplinarity	The integration of methods and concepts from multiple disciplines to address complex issues in literary and cultural studies.	Emphasized in both Theory and Post-Theory as a way to expand analytical perspectives.
Deconstruction	A method of analysis that reveals the contradictions and instability of meaning within texts and systems of thought.	Key to Derrida’s critique of Western metaphysics and binary oppositions.
Human Sciences	Disciplines that study human behavior’ culture’ and society through qualitative and interpretive methods.	Differentiated from traditional humanities and natural sciences in Foucault’s framework.

Contribution of “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian to Literary Theory/Theories

• Clarification of the Evolution of Literary Theory
  Zhou Xian outlines the development of literary theory across three distinct paradigms: modern literary theory (formalism)’ theory (interdisciplinary grand narratives)’ and post-theory (localized’ reflexive approaches) (Zhou’ 2010′ pp. 2–4).
  • This historical trajectory situates literary theory within broader cultural’ social’ and intellectual transformations.
• Integration of Human Sciences into Theory
  The article highlights the shift from traditional humanities to human sciences‘ a discipline defined by Foucault that focuses on representation’ discourse’ and the coexistence of power and knowledge (Zhou’ 2010′ pp. 7–8).
  • This perspective expands literary studies into sociological’ psychological’ and historical contexts.
• Critique of Universalism and Essentialism
  Zhou critiques the universal value systems of modern literary theory’ emphasizing the fragmentation and relativism introduced by postmodern and poststructuralist approaches (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 14).
  • Theories such as deconstruction and cultural studies dismantled grand narratives’ focusing on multiplicity and local contexts.
• Contribution to Post-Theory
  Post-theory’s reflexive stance’ as discussed by Zhou’ advances the study of literature by examining the methodologies and assumptions underpinning literary theory itself (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 15).
  • It emphasizes small-scale’ localized theories over overarching’ hegemonic frameworks.
• Reaffirmation of Aesthetic Values in Literary Studies
  Zhou stresses the importance of returning to the aesthetic dimensions of literature’ countering the politicization and trivialization seen in some ideological frameworks (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 16).
  • Inspired by thinkers like Susan Sontag and Murray Krieger’ the article calls for a balance between aesthetic and ideological concerns.
• Advancement of Interdisciplinary Methodologies
  The inclusion of methodologies from disciplines such as philosophy’ political science’ and sociology enriches the scope of literary studies (Zhou’ 2010′ pp. 10–11).
  • The interdisciplinary nature of “Theory” aligns with contributions from figures like Derrida’ Foucault’ and Lacan.
• Critique of Over-politicization in Theory
  The article critiques the politics of theory that often reduce literature to socio-political analyses’ advocating for a more nuanced engagement with text and context (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 13).
  • This reflects a broader call for theoretical plurality and depth.
• Introduction of Reflexivity in Theory
  Post-theory’s focus on reflexivity’ or the self-critique of theoretical frameworks’ is highlighted as a significant contribution to modern literary studies (Zhou’ 2010′ pp. 14–15).
  • Reflexivity enables scholars to study not only literature but also the methodologies used to analyze it.
• Recontextualization of French Theory and its Influence
  Zhou emphasizes the transformative impact of French Theory‘ particularly deconstruction and post-structuralism’ on modern literary theory (Zhou’ 2010′ pp. 7–8).
  • This contribution bridges the gap between linguistic-centered theories and broader cultural critiques.
• Response to Institutional Challenges
  The article addresses the challenges posed by the institutionalization and commercialization of literary studies’ advocating for a theoretical framework that is self-aware and adaptable (Zhou’ 2010′ pp. 16–17).
  • This makes post-theory a tool for resisting the commodification of intellectual work.

Examples of Critiques Through “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian

Literary Work	Theoretical Framework	Key Critique Through Zhou Xian’s Lens	References from Zhou Xian
Shakespeare’s Hamlet	Modern Literary Theory (Formalism)	Focuses on the aesthetic and linguistic elements’ emphasizing the structure and language of the play.	Zhou notes that modern literary theory prioritizes formalist analyses of texts’ focusing on intrinsic qualities (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 3).
James Joyce’s Ulysses	Theory (Interdisciplinary Approaches)	Interpreted through cultural’ political’ and psychoanalytic frameworks’ linking the text to broader issues of identity’ ideology’ and power.	Zhou highlights how theory incorporates external disciplines like psychoanalysis and Marxism into literary critiques (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 7).
Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart	Post-Theory (Localized and Reflexive Approaches)	Emphasizes the multiplicity of interpretations’ focusing on postcolonial themes and localized cultural contexts while avoiding universalist readings.	Zhou discusses post-theory’s embrace of diversity and rejection of grand narratives in favor of local context (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 15).
Virginia Woolf’s To the Lighthouse	Transition from Formalism to Theory	Critiqued through both aesthetic elements (modernism) and interdisciplinary approaches’ including feminist and psychoanalytic perspectives.	Zhou examines how theory bridges aesthetic and political dimensions in literary studies (Zhou’ 2010′ p. 10).

Criticism Against “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian

• Overgeneralization of Historical Phases
  Zhou’s categorization of “literary theory'” “theory'” and “post-theory” into distinct historical phases may oversimplify the complex and overlapping developments within literary studies.
• Limited Engagement with Non-Western Perspectives
  Despite acknowledging the global impact of theory’ Zhou’s analysis primarily focuses on Western traditions like French Theory and modernism’ leaving non-Western theoretical contributions underexplored.
• Neglect of Specific Case Studies
  The article discusses broad theoretical paradigms but lacks concrete application of these frameworks to specific literary works’ which could illustrate the theories more effectively.
• Ambiguity in the Definition of Post-Theory
  While Zhou emphasizes reflexivity and multiplicity’ the precise boundaries and methodologies of post-theory remain vague’ raising questions about its practical utility in literary analysis.
• Underrepresentation of Contemporary Theories
  The article pays significant attention to structuralism’ poststructuralism’ and grand theories but does not engage deeply with emerging fields like digital humanities or ecocriticism.
• Tension Between Aesthetic and Political Critiques
  Zhou advocates for a return to aesthetic values while critiquing the politicization of literary studies’ but this dual stance can seem contradictory or insufficiently reconciled.
• Reliance on Established Thinkers
  The article heavily references canonical figures like Derrida’ Foucault’ and Eagleton’ potentially reinforcing dominant theoretical narratives without exploring less mainstream voices.
• Inadequate Critique of Institutional Dynamics
  While Zhou critiques the commercialization of literary studies’ the discussion lacks actionable insights or solutions to address the institutional challenges faced by scholars today.
• Excessive Theoretical Abstraction
  The highly abstract nature of Zhou’s discussion may limit its accessibility to readers unfamiliar with complex theoretical jargon or the nuances of literary studies.

Representative Quotations from “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“The 20th century is regarded as an era of ‘theory’s empire’’ in which we witnessed the gradual intrusion of literary theory into various fields.”	This highlights how literary theory expanded its influence beyond literature’ becoming an interdisciplinary approach that impacted other domains’ such as philosophy and cultural studies.
“‘Theory of literature’ is a higher-level theoretical study which could encompass the theory of literary criticism and literary history.”	Zhou delineates theory of literature as a broad’ systematic approach to literature that incorporates critical and historical perspectives’ distinguishing it from narrower methodologies like formalist literary criticism.
“Literary theory emerged as a fully modern concept because it is more accurate than its traditional counterparts such as ‘poetics.’”	The concept of literary theory evolved in the modern era to address broader concerns’ moving beyond traditional poetics that focused narrowly on poetry to encompass diverse literary forms and their principles.
“Contemporary literary theory comes into its own in such events as the application of Saussurean linguistics to the literary text.”	This underscores the pivotal role of structural linguistics’ as introduced by Saussure’ in shaping modern literary theory and providing tools for analyzing the underlying structures of literary works.
“Theory has become impure as it engages the social and political world through the reading of literature.”	This reflects the politicization of theory’ where literary studies have expanded to interrogate social’ cultural’ and political phenomena’ moving beyond traditional aesthetics.
“The emergence of theory is the moment when a practice begins to curve upon itself’ so as to scrutinize its own conditions of possibility.”	Zhou explains the self-reflexive nature of theory’ emphasizing how theoretical frameworks critically examine their own assumptions’ methodologies’ and relevance.
“‘Post-theory’ marks the decline of grand narratives but still bears some features of grand theory in its own paradigm.”	This statement captures the transition to post-theory’ characterized by skepticism towards overarching explanatory systems while still maintaining a theoretical lens for analysis.
“Theory has completely exposed that the so-called aesthetic and art value is only the function of some particular ideology.”	Zhou critiques traditional notions of aesthetic value’ suggesting that they are not universal but instead shaped by ideological contexts and power structures.
“Post-theory puts more weight on diversity and locality’ favoring neither the monotonous linguistic mode nor the interdisciplinary mode of postmodern theory.”	Post-theory emphasizes pluralistic and localized approaches’ avoiding the reductive tendencies of earlier frameworks while allowing for diverse perspectives and smaller-scale analyses.
“With the focus shifted to the grand problems’ literature as a symbolic social construction gradually loses its aesthetic features in ideological analyses.”	Zhou critiques how excessive focus on ideology in literary studies risks overshadowing the aesthetic and artistic qualities of literature’ calling for a more balanced approach that integrates aesthetics with critical theory.

Suggested Readings: “Literary Theory’ Theory’ And Post-Theory” by Zhou Xian

1. Zhou’ Xian. “Literary theory’ theory’ and post-theory.” Frontiers of Literary Studies in China 4 (2010): 1-18.
2. Pulleyblank’ E. G. “Chinese Dialect Studies.” Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series‘ no. 3′ 1991’ pp. 429–53. JSTOR‘ http://www.jstor.org/stable/23827045. Accessed 12 Jan. 2025.
3. HUEHLS’ MITCHUM. “The Post-Theory Theory Novel.” Contemporary Literature‘ vol. 56′ no. 2′ 2015’ pp. 280–310. JSTOR‘ http://www.jstor.org/stable/24735009. Accessed 12 Jan. 2025.
4. FLISFEDER’ MATTHEW. “BETWEEN THEORY AND POST-THEORY; OR’ SLAVOJ ŽIŽEK IN FILM STUDIES AND OUT.” Revue Canadienne d’Études Cinématographiques / Canadian Journal of Film Studies‘ vol. 20′ no. 2′ 2011’ pp. 75–94. JSTOR‘ http://www.jstor.org/stable/24411838. Accessed 12 Jan. 2025.