Professing the Renaissance: The Poetics and Politics of Culture Type: Chapter; Author(s): Louis Montrose; Date: ; Page start: ; Page end: ; Web. Louis Adrian Montrose is an American literary theorist and academic scholar. His scholarship has addressed a wide variety of literary, historical, and theoretical topics and issues, and has significantly shaped contemporary studies of Renaissance poetics, English Renaissance theatre, Louis Montrose’s Homepage · Professing the Renaissance · Miriam Chen’s. Professing the Renaissance: The Poetics and Politics of Culture. Louis A. Montrose. There has recently emerged within Renaissance studies, as in Anglo- Ameri.
|Country:||Sao Tome and Principe|
|Published (Last):||1 November 2006|
|PDF File Size:||8.19 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.73 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
While it issues an antitheoretical stance against literary theory, it does so by using literary theory to make its point, proving its necessity whilst trying to undo it. Placed first among a group of verses that commend Spenser’s heroic poem to its royal reader in the edition is a sonnet in which Sir Walter Ralegh envisions Spenser as overgoing sic Petrarch – not the heroic poet of the Latin Africa but the love poet of the vernacular Canzoniere and Trionfi.
The New Historicism of Stephen Greenblatt. Unlike my supervisor, I did not find myself looking for words in the cellar of a bookshop in Utrecht; instead, I found myself inspired in a lecture hall in Ghent back in Maythe last semester of my third year pfofessing an undergraduate student. In doing so, perhaps this thesis may find a foundation for what Veeser To mirror the structure of the previous parts of this thesis, the analysis will be divided into four subsections as well: And lastly, I would like to thank my wonderful girlfriend Ine Verheyen, for her support and also for correcting my work and spotting the odd comma, which is not my strong suit; thank you very much.
It is a question this thesis will not attempt to answer. As a consequence, through the analyses of different individual reading methods, the framework can be adapted to ultimately accommodate if possible an even larger shared methodology, or it lpuis be reassessed and changed when these analyses would show that there is a significant difference between theory and practice within the New Historicism.
Of interest here is how, not what, forces historical, social, economic, biographical, sexual, rpofessing, psychological, and so on interact with these productions and interpretive practices.
For one, it shows that despite the claims of the New Historicists of the heterogeneity of the practice, there can at least be said to be a shared methodology amongst its practitioners. Greenblatt, Stephen and G. New historicism challenged this model’s a priori distinction between internal and external domains, pressing for an integral and also rwnaissance generative relationship between text and context, and between form and content, in this way grafting a core thesis of the formalist paradigm onto traditional historical scholarship.
Some reconstruct discourse by examining extraneous cultural artefacts. However, what does this tell us about the New Historicism? Johns Hopkins University Press, b.
In that sense, Montrose a: For the purpose of consistency, this thesis refers to him simply as Montrose, Louis in the bibliography, disregarding whatever form of his name the original publication states, and as Montrose within the running text. Loui, there is little evidence from the other texts discussed here to back that assumption to its full extent.
This would not have been possible without his help and I am very grateful for it. Levinson is a Romantic scholar – should provide a broader view of the New Historicist theoretical practice. The constructions of the past are presumed as intimately tied to the present.
Enter the email address you signed up with and we’ll email louix a reset link. However, the work needed in order to fully excavate these poetics could not be undertaken in the span of a thesis. As pointed earlier, while his name is mentioned several times alongside those of Stephen Greenblatt and Catherine Gallagher, very little attention has been paid to his actual work so far. While comparative genetic criticism would be necessary to discover who voiced these basic premises first, the fact they seem recurring in some form of another in the seven introductory texts, sometimes ths almost proffessing terms, cannot be regarded as coincidence.
For Hens-Piazza then, the New Historicism views literature like other social and cultural practices, artifacts, relics and data of a context.
By representing the world in discourse, texts are engaged in constructing the world and in accommodating their writers, performers, readers, and audiences to positions within it.
These texts are the following: If, on the other hand, this is a cultural reference, then Montrose cannot be said to be diachronic in the analyses that are studied here. The excerpt here is one that illustrates the synchronic autonomy of the text against culture: The job of the translator-critic – our job – is to produce this point of departure.
Louis Montrose | Literary Theory and Criticism
If in an initial stage the shared methodology would already prove to be inconsistent, the conclusion must have been that either closer study was needed or that it is not possible to speak of a shared framework within the New Historicism. Pieters was always ready for me with helpful commentary and useful suggestions on what to improve and continually pushed me to improve my work. Overall, it seems as though Montrose is regarded as an example of the New Historicist practice.
This creates a historical and ideological distance that needs to be observed, which causes the author to be a historical and social construction both of his own time and that of the observer. Disregarding minor differences, Montrose did prove to be a theoretical equal to his New Historicist peers. Current practice emphasizes both the relative autonomy of specific discourses and their capacity to impact upon the social formation, montros make things happen by shaping the consciousness of social beings.
Authority, Gender and Representation. Somehow this denotes a certain importance that Montrose has had to the field, but so far the field has been unable to pinpoint exactly as to what that importance may have been.
Literature is viewed as integrally tied to and identified with other material realities that make up a social context. I can safely say that he has become a mentor rather than a mere supervisor.