Abstract
New Historicism is the most innovative and popular critical movement that came into existence in 1980’s. The credit for the emergence of this new critical manifesto goes to Stephen Greenblatt who initiates a reactionary canon in the sphere of literary theory to the prevailing text-oriented critical approaches pursued by New Critics, Deconstructionists, Structuralists and Post Structuralists. New Historicists, like these rigid followers of linguistic approaches, undoubtedly acknowledge the importance of literary text, however, they also analyze it with an insight into its historicity as literary text does not exist in cultural vacuum. The phrase coined by Louis Montrose ‘historicity of the text and textuality of history’ is the critical premise of New Historicists. Since the present paper aims at finding the traces of New Historicism in Trilling’s critical tenets in his critical work The Opposing Self, hence this is but imperative and authoritative to do an intensive and close textual study of this treatise to locate the seeds of New Historicism and at the same time determining the distinctions between the basic premises of both. In order to accomplish this pursuit, an attempt is here being made to analyze how Trilling stresses the direct and reciprocal relationship between literature and culture with his specific focus on individual self which always remains in constant conflict with culture for its survival. Moreover, dialectical and discursive nature of literature along with its literariness will also be taken into account so that the political nature of literature may also be discerned. In addition to this, an analysis of consciously unconscious self of the writer will also be analyzed so as to understand how the covert depiction of ideology in a work of art is possible because it prevents literature to turn into sheer propaganda. This analysis would definitely reveal the fundamental similarities and dissimilarities between Lionel Trilling’s critical canon and that of New Historicists with a hypothetical feasibility of Lionel Trilling’s contribution to New Historicism. This is the focal issue that has to be scrutinized here as New Historicists too like Lionel Trilling think that for a literary critic ‘an honest place [is] in between.’
Keywords: New Historicism, Textuality, Co-texts, Text, Power Politics, Foucault, Barthes, Self, Freud, Power Politics, Implied Self, Historicity, Literariness, and Irony
Literature as a Cultural Construct
The Opposing Self is a distinguished and richly rewarding critical treatise that came into existence in 1955 in America after many years. This is considered to be the most significant critical book compiling nine essays heralding Lionel Trilling’s basic critical tenets because he has attempted to revolutionize modern literary theory by propounding a pioneering critical approach to literature with his specific emphasis on literariness of a text along with its sociological aspects. It refers to a rudimentary inclusion of the study of ‘self’ and ‘psyche’ of an individual relative to social and cultural life because this is the very ‘self’ which persistently remains in constant struggle with the existing culture in which it exists and is influenced by and influences it to some extent.
Lionel Trilling never denies the fact that literature is a cultural construct as is propounded by New Historicists also, hence this premise can be observed in almost all his critical works and The Opposing Self (1955) is of great significance from this perspective. In one of the essays contained in this work titled “Little Dorrit,” Trilling determines this fact as he writes, “‘Little Dorrit,’ one of the most profound of Dickens novels and one of the most significant works of nineteenth century, will not fail to be thought of as speaking with a particular and passionate intimacy to our own time” (51).
New Historicism is a critical approach which disrupts the extremity of purely formal and linguistic critical canon and dogmatism of close textual analysis of a work at the expense of its extrinsic value embedded in its intrinsic part. Moreover, New Historicism aims at rehistorization of text whether literary or non-literary and ascribes due significance to the cultural condition of its production, meaning, impact, its interpretation and evaluation, that is, a literary text is produced and actualized in cultural conditions, not in vacuum.
Trilling on Literature, Self, and Society
Trilling recommends his critical reader that “he will involve us in the enjoyment of moral activity through the medium of a lively awareness of manners” (The Opposing Self 77). However, it should not be confused with moralism rather he is much more concerned with the representation of moral realism. It implies that literature deals with the moral condition of a particular culture prevailed within the cultural scenario because literature embodies every activity of human life.
In the preface to The Opposing Self, he comes forward to suggest that “the idea [self] preoccupies … literature and is central to it, and makes its principle and its unity — the idea of self” and that literature is a cultural construct. The portrayal of essential reality in literature is Trilling’s fundamental critical tenet because as Rene Wellek and Austin Warren have also well remarked in Theory of Literature, “Literature is really not a reflection of the social process, but the essence, the abridgement and summary of all history” (95).
Literature as Political and Discursive
Trilling strongly advocates that literature must be the replica of socio-cultural life and hence addresses Howells “as a historian figure” because he perceives literature in close connection with culture and society and also suggests that a critic, while studying a work of literature, should keep in mind the social and cultural situation of the period of which the work is an integral part.
New historicists, greatly influenced by Michel Foucault’s concept of the discursive nature of literature, came to suggest the strategy of political reading of the text because they opine that any texts whether literary or non-literary is a cultural construct and reveals the political, social, religious and economic circumstances of the given era though not explicitly expressed but implicitly revealed in a work.
Hence, Trilling tends to suggest that a writer’s main business is to write about political issues which affect the lives of common people, not necessarily with conscious efforts rather unconsciously as is very much in the basic tenet of Historicism.
The Unconscious Self and Ideology in Literature
Trilling advocates that literature should be a political-discursive as politics constitutes a significant aspect of human life, he is very much against the conviction that literature should be reduced to sheer political propaganda. He intends to imply is the covert prognosis of political issues in literary work of art, which is synonymous with ‘political unconscious’ with effective handling of literary techniques.
As greatly influenced by such theorists as Ronald Barthes and Michel Foucault, New historicists ascribes significance to a text which is discursive in nature and denies the presence of ‘empirical self’ of the author but at the same time cannot dismiss the ‘implied self’ of the author. Trilling denotes that Homage to Catalonia is also written with autobiographical elements but these elements are not directly expressed; and that the personal voice of the author represents the whole voice of common people.
Trilling on Power Politics and the Self
Lionel Trilling ascribes equal significance to literariness of a work along with its historicity and cultural significance. In his critical analysis of Charles Dickens’ Little Dorrit, Trilling underscores the symbol of prison which connotes the suppressed individual ‘self’ imprisoned and governed the subtle tendrils of power structures and strictures of social responsibilities, religious and moral code of conduct. Michel Foucault underpins the same conviction of unbound disciplinary powers exercising their unseen but subtle power politics on individual self.
As Sigmund Freud has determined that the individual self can be divided into three parts, namely, ‘unconscious,’ ‘subconscious’ and ‘conscious.’ Since Freud has propounded and Trilling derived from him the whole understanding of the mechanism of human psyche which has a rational side to control the irrational aspect of unconscious and subconscious and thus restrains the non-confirmative wills and desires of the unconscious.
Trilling on Feminism and Discursive Literature
Lionel Trilling, like New Historicists, appreciates literature because it ‘dialectical’ and ‘discursive’ practice. He also believes that if literature is discursive by nature, it may not only depict just history but histories of the particular time. Trilling analyses this discursive nature of literature when he critically examines Henry James’ writings and points out how he presents the feminist movement in The Bostonians.
Moreover, Trilling rejects the traditional concept of male literary tradition by putting forth his critical manifesto which includes great women writers along with male ones and hence it would not be wrong to assert that his critical credo seems to include Feminist Literary Criticism. He also averts male writers’ repugnance to female writers just because of gender based discrimination.
Conclusion
To conclude, it can be said that art requires an appropriate theory which should be all-inclusive. Whether it is New Historicism or Trilling’s critical canon of cultural criticism, the fact remains intact that both contribute relatively to a broader enterprise. Though Trilling did not belong to any established movement of literary criticism, however, the significance and relevance of his professional achievement and critical canon is replicated and has impacted the arena of literary theory and pedagogy with its inclusive return to empirical scholarship, revival of the critique of ideology. Thus, after his death, Trilling’s cultural criticism became once again attractive in the late 1980s as many literary academics recoiled to Marxism and post-structuralism because he believed that the ‘honest place is in between.’ Moreover, this analysis also establishes Trilling as a pioneer of cultural criticism or new historicism, though hypothetically, because he has rendered his services to the critical question or literary problems which are yet to be solved by scholars and critics of future generation.
Works Cited
- Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. Australia: Thomson and Heine. 1999.
- Baldick, Chris. Oxford Concise Dictionary of Literary Terms. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2005.
- Das, Bijay Kumar. Twentieth Century Literary Criticism. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, 2000.
- Kubal, David. “Lionel Trilling: The Mind and Its Discontents.” Hudson Review 31.2 (Summer 1978): 279-295.
- Meyers, Jeffrey. A Reader’s Guide to George Orwell. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd, 1984.
- Rajnath. Critical Speculations. New Delhi: Doaba House, 1996.
- Shoben, Edward Joseph. Lionel Trilling. New York: Frederick Unger Publishing Co., 1984.
- Trilling, Lionel. The Opposing Self: Nine Essays in Criticism. New York: The Viking Press, 1955.
- ---. Freud and Crisis of Our Culture. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955.
- Wellek, Rene and Austin Warren. The Theory of Literature. New York: Viking Penguin Inc., 1973.