Rewriting Literary History
"Racial Memory and Literary History" by Stephen Greenblatt, in PMLA (Jan. 2001), Modern Language Assn. of America, 26 Broadway, 3rd fl., New York, N.Y. 10004-1789.
The idea that nations have their own distinctive literary histories has come under strong scholarly assault in recent decades. Feminists, deconstructionists, and New Historicists have charged that traditional national literary histories, with their narratives of collective progress, give a false unity to what was a multicultural reality. But now, as feminist, black, Hispanic, and gay and lesbian scholars write their own literary histories, many are adopting the same traditional historical narrative of unfolding progress, even if not on the national level. In doing this, contends Greenblatt, a professor of humanities at Harvard University and a leading New Historicist, they are making "a serious mistake."
"It is one thing," he says, "to celebrate powerful literary achievements and to understand how new work can build on the work of the past; it is quite another thing to endorse a theory of evolutionary progress or steady, organic development that one knows is bankrupt." In The Cambridge History of Latin American Literature (1996), for instance, editors Roberto Gonzales Echevarria and Enrique Pupa-Walker "genially acknowledge that [their] sense of continuity is a fiction," Greenblatt says, yet they insist "'it does not matter."' But truth, he objects, does matter in writing literary history, as …
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Article title: Rewriting Literary History. Contributors: Not available. Magazine title: The Wilson Quarterly. Volume: 25. Issue: 3 Publication date: Summer 2001. Page number: 97. © Not available. COPYRIGHT 2001 Gale Group.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.