Introduction: “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose
“Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” by Louis A. Montrose first appeared in 1986 as part of the collection Shakespearean Studies. This seminal essay has been instrumental in shaping the field of Renaissance studies, offering a groundbreaking approach that explores the intricate relationship between literature, culture, and power. Montrose argues that literary texts are not merely products of individual genius but rather are deeply embedded in the social and political contexts of their production. By examining how Renaissance authors engaged with and challenged prevailing cultural norms, Montrose revolutionized our understanding of the period and its literature, leaving a lasting impact on literary theory and criticism.
Summary of “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose
- Emergence of New Historicism in Renaissance Studies
- Renaissance studies have seen a shift towards examining the historical, social, and political conditions influencing literary production. This approach challenges the traditional view of literature as an autonomous aesthetic activity.
- Montrose highlights this shift: “The writing and reading of texts, as well as the processes by which they are circulated and categorized, analyzed and taught, are being reconstrued as historically determined and determining modes of cultural work.”
- Interplay Between Literature and Social Contexts
- New Historicism repositions literary works within their socio-cultural contexts, considering the influence of social institutions and non-discursive practices on literary production.
- This approach reorients the focus from a purely textual analysis to understanding texts as part of a broader cultural system, as Montrose notes: “The axis of inter-textuality, substituting for the diachronic text of an autonomous literary history the synchronic text of a cultural system.”
- Rejection of Traditional Interpretations
- The traditional approach to Renaissance literature, which focused on formalist analysis and self-contained histories of ideas, is criticized for its abstraction from social contexts. Montrose argues against this by stating that New Historicism resists “unproblematized distinctions between ‘literature’ and ‘history,’ between ‘text’ and ‘context.'”
- This new approach refuses to treat literary works as separate from the socio-political environment in which they were created.
- Challenges and Complexities of New Historicism
- Montrose discusses the complex issues that New Historicism confronts, including the relationship between cultural practices and social processes, and the impact of post-structuralist theories on historical criticism.
- He emphasizes that New Historicism is not about providing definitive answers but about engaging with these issues: “The term ‘New Historicism’ is currently being invoked in order to bring such issues into play and to stake out…specific positions within the discursive spaces mapped by these issues.”
- Historicity of Texts and Textuality of History
- Montrose introduces the idea that texts are historically specific and socially embedded, and that history itself is mediated through texts. This notion challenges the possibility of accessing an “authentic” past without the mediation of texts.
- He articulates this concept: “We can have no access to a full and authentic past, a lived material existence, unmediated by the surviving textual traces of the society in question.”
- New Socio-Historical Criticism
- The goal of New Historicism is to analyze the interaction of culture-specific discursive practices, recognizing that such analysis is also a cultural practice influenced by its historical and social context.
- Montrose calls for a recognition of the historian’s role in shaping history: “The histories we reconstruct are the textual constructs of critics who are, ourselves, historical subjects.”
- Continuous Dialogue Between Poetics and Politics
- Montrose concludes that historical criticism today must acknowledge the critic’s own historical context and the dynamic relationship between past and present. This ongoing dialogue shapes both the interpretation of Renaissance texts and contemporary understanding of history.
- He summarizes this approach: “Such a critical practice constitutes a continuous dialogue between a poetics and a politics of culture.”
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose
| Term | Definition |
| New Historicism | A critical approach that examines literature within its historical and cultural context, emphasizing the interconnectedness of texts and the social, political, and economic forces that shaped them. |
| Cultural Materialism | A similar approach to New Historicism, focusing on the material conditions and social practices that influence the production and reception of literature. |
| Cultural Poetics | A term coined by Stephen Greenblatt to describe the intersection of formalist and historical concerns in literary analysis. |
| Intertextuality | The interconnectedness of texts, where one text references or is influenced by another. |
| Cultural System | The network of discourses, practices, and institutions that constitute a particular culture. |
| Discursive Construction | The idea that social reality is shaped through language and discourse. |
| Dialogical Language-Use | The understanding that language is always situated within a social context and involves interaction with others. |
| Historicity of Texts | The recognition that texts are products of their specific historical and cultural contexts. |
| Textuality of History | The idea that history is constructed through textual traces and interpretations, and that our understanding of the past is mediated by these texts. |
| Subjectivity | The socially and historically constructed identity of an individual. |
| Agency | The capacity of individuals to act and influence their circumstances, while also being constrained by social structures. |
| Ideology | A system of beliefs and values that shape social and political structures. |
| Subject Position | The various roles and identities that individuals occupy within society. |
| Referentiality | The relationship between a linguistic sign and its referent in the real world. |
| Social Production of Literature | The idea that literature is shaped by social and cultural forces, and that it also performs work within society. |
| Stratification | The hierarchical arrangement of social groups based on factors like class, race, and gender. |
| Cultural Politics | The struggle over the meaning and control of cultural representations and practices. |
Contribution of “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose to Literary Theory/Theories
- Historical Contextualization: Montrose’s essay emphasized the importance of examining literary texts within their specific historical and cultural contexts, challenging the traditional focus on autonomous literary works.
- Interconnectedness of Text and Context: He argued that texts are not merely products of individual genius but are deeply embedded in the social and political structures of their time.
- Deconstruction of Authorial Authority: Montrose questioned the notion of the author as a unified, autonomous individual, instead focusing on the social and cultural factors that shaped their writing.
- Material Conditions and Social Practices: Montrose’s work highlighted the influence of material conditions and social practices on literary production and reception, aligning with the core tenets of Cultural Materialism.
- Power and Ideology: He explored the ways in which literature can be used to reinforce or challenge dominant ideologies and power structures.
- Resistance and Subversion: Montrose examined how literary texts can be sites of resistance and subversion against oppressive social and political forces.
- Interconnectedness of Texts: Montrose’s essay explored the interconnectedness of literary texts, emphasizing their relationship to other genres, modes of discourse, and social institutions.
- Cultural System: He argued that texts are part of a larger cultural system, and their meaning is shaped by their relationship to other texts within that system.
- Interdisciplinary Approach: Montrose’s work embraced an interdisciplinary approach to literary studies, incorporating insights from history, sociology, anthropology, and other fields.
- Power and Representation: He examined the ways in which literature is involved in the production and circulation of power and knowledge.
- Subjectivity and Agency: Montrose explored the ways in which individuals are shaped by social and cultural forces, while also possessing agency to resist or challenge these forces.
- Deconstruction of Authorial Authority: Montrose’s critique of the author as a unified, autonomous individual aligns with post-structuralist theories that challenge the concept of the author.
- Language and Meaning: He explored the ways in which language and meaning are socially and historically constructed, challenging the notion of a fixed or stable meaning.
- Deconstruction of Binary Oppositions: Montrose questioned the binary oppositions that have traditionally dominated literary criticism, such as literature versus history or high culture versus popular culture.
Examples of Critiques Through “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose
| Literary Work | Critique Through Montrose’s Lens | Key Concepts |
| William Shakespeare’s Hamlet | Hamlet is analyzed not merely as a psychological drama but as a text deeply embedded in the sociopolitical conflicts of the Elizabethan era. Montrose would emphasize the cultural and ideological forces shaping the play’s themes of power, authority, and madness. | Cultural Poetics, Socio-political context, Historical specificity |
| Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus | Doctor Faustus is critiqued as a reflection of the tensions between emerging Renaissance individualism and the traditional religious ideologies. Montrose would focus on how the text negotiates these conflicting forces within its cultural moment. | Conflict of ideologies, Social and religious context, Individualism |
| Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene | Through Montrose’s perspective, The Faerie Queene would be examined as a politically charged text that reinforces and challenges the dominant Elizabethan ideologies, particularly in relation to national identity and moral order. | National identity, Ideological reinforcement, Cultural production |
| John Milton’s Paradise Lost | Paradise Lost would be analyzed as a text that engages with the political turmoil of the English Civil War, reflecting Milton’s own ideological struggles and the broader cultural debates about authority, freedom, and divine justice. | Political turmoil, Authority and freedom, Ideological struggle |
Criticism Against “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose
- Overemphasis on Historical Context: Critics argue that Montrose’s focus on the socio-political and historical context can overshadow the literary and aesthetic qualities of the texts, reducing literature to merely a reflection of its time rather than appreciating its artistic value.
- Reductionism: There is a concern that Montrose’s approach might lead to a reductive interpretation of literature, where complex literary works are boiled down to their socio-political dimensions, neglecting other interpretive possibilities.
- Neglect of Authorial Intent: Some scholars criticize Montrose for downplaying or ignoring the role of authorial intent, focusing instead on external cultural forces. This can be seen as dismissive of the creative agency of the author.
- Potential for Anachronism: Montrose’s method of linking Renaissance texts to contemporary socio-political concerns might lead to anachronistic readings, where modern concepts and ideologies are retroactively imposed on historical texts.
- Ambiguity in Theory Application: Critics point out that while Montrose advocates for a blend of formalist and historicist analysis, there is sometimes ambiguity in how these approaches should be applied in practice, leading to inconsistencies in critical interpretation.
- Marginalization of Literary Form: By prioritizing historical and cultural contexts, Montrose’s approach can marginalize the importance of literary form and stylistic innovation, which are essential aspects of literary studies.
Suggested Readings: “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose
- Greenblatt, Stephen. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare. University of Chicago Press, 1980.
- Veeser, Harold Aram, ed. The New Historicism. Routledge, 1989.
- Belsey, Catherine. The Subject of Tragedy: Shakespeare and the Discourse of Desire. Methuen, 1985.
- McClennen, Joshua J. The Poetics of Power: Shakespeare and the Cultural Politics of the Renaissance. University of Chicago Press, 2006.
- Montrose, Louis Adrian. “‘Shaping Fantasies’: Figurations of Gender and Power in Elizabethan Culture.” Representations, no. 2, 1983, pp. 61–94. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2928384. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
- Montrose, Louis A. “Idols of the Queen: Policy, Gender, and the Picturing of Elizabeth I.” Representations, no. 68, 1999, pp. 108–61. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2902957. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
- Montrose, Louis Adrian. “‘The Place of a Brother’ in ‘As You Like It’: Social Process and Comic Form.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 1, 1981, pp. 28–54. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2870285. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
- Montrose, Louis Adrian. “Of Gentlemen and Shepherds: The Politics of Elizabethan Pastoral Form.” ELH, vol. 50, no. 3, 1983, pp. 415–59. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2872864. Accessed 24 Aug. 2024.
Representative Quotations from “Professing The Renaissance: The Poetics And Politics Of Culture” By Louis A. Montrose with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “The writing and reading of texts, as well as the processes by which they are circulated and categorized…are being reconstrued as historically determined and determining modes of cultural work.” | Montrose emphasizes that literary texts and their interpretation are deeply influenced by historical and cultural contexts, challenging the notion of literature as an autonomous entity. |
| “The axis of inter-textuality, substituting for the diachronic text of an autonomous literary history the synchronic text of a cultural system.” | This highlights Montrose’s shift from viewing literary works in isolation (diachronic) to seeing them as part of a larger, contemporary cultural system (synchronic). |
| “Formal and historical concerns are not opposed but rather are inseparable.” | Montrose argues against the dichotomy between formalist and historicist approaches, advocating for an integrated method that considers both aspects as mutually reinforcing. |
| “New Historicism is new in its refusal of unproblematized distinctions between ‘literature’ and ‘history,’ between ‘text’ and ‘context’.” | This quotation reflects the New Historicist approach, which challenges the separation between literary texts and their historical contexts, treating them as interconnected. |
| “We can have no access to a full and authentic past, a lived material existence, unmediated by the surviving textual traces of the society in question.” | Montrose underscores the idea that our understanding of history is always mediated through texts, and thus we can never fully access an unmediated historical reality. |
| “The freely self-creating and world-creating Individual of so-called bourgeois humanism is – at least, in theory – now defunct.” | This statement critiques the Enlightenment concept of the autonomous individual, suggesting that subjectivity is socially and historically constructed rather than innate. |
| “The histories we reconstruct are the textual constructs of critics who are, ourselves, historical subjects.” | Montrose acknowledges that historians and critics are themselves products of their historical contexts, influencing their interpretations of the past. |
| “The project of a new socio-historical criticism is…to analyze the interplay of culture-specific discursive practices.” | Montrose defines the aim of New Historicism as studying the interaction of different cultural discourses within their specific historical contexts. |
| “Such a critical practice constitutes a continuous dialogue between a poetics and a politics of culture.” | Montrose concludes that literary criticism should engage in a dynamic exchange between the artistic (poetics) and the societal (politics) aspects of culture. |
| “Recent theories of textuality have argued persuasively that the referent of a linguistic sign cannot be fixed; that the meaning of a text cannot be stabilized.” | This quotation reflects post-structuralist influences on Montrose’s thinking, emphasizing the fluidity of meaning in texts and the instability of linguistic signs. |