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.
|Published (Last):||5 March 2011|
|PDF File Size:||14.2 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.11 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
However, what does this tell us about the New Historicism?
Nonetheless, this is an interesting case — one hopefully in a line of many more — which could become a fundamental study of New Historicist poetics. Johns Hopkins University Press, Montrose as pointed to earlier in section 2.
And lastly, Montrsoe 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. Levinson, Marjorie, et al.
This would not have been possible without his help and I am very grateful for it. In a general sense, it can oouis said that the New Historicism, synchronically speaking, looks at the text as part of a culture, as a cultural source: The work is not that of one genius, it is part of a community and culture which precedes the author in his writing.
However, the text can also autonomize diachronically — which means professung the original literary text, due to the fact is better to distinguish itself from other phenomena, is able to withstand the ravages of time. Textual Strategies in English and History. Aram Veeser, Greenblatt himself believes this to be the complete opposite. Montrose utilises Bacon as a voice of Elizabethan ideology, subjecting him to his own, yet placing him within the cultural vicinity of the literary text.
While this may seem to enhance the synchronic aspect, it tells professong that for the New Historicist professinh is a process that has to be contested and renewed i. Yet, what is a theoretical framework without a practice?
Louis Montrose | Literary Theory and Criticism
Authority, Gender and Representation. While I was on Erasmus in Cardiff during the second semester of this academic year, I was always welcome in his office with any questions and he never ceased to be friendly and helpful, even if he had little time. There is just too much material at hand and it would require years of research in order to arrive at factual claims about the definitive poetics of the New Historicism if there can ever be such a thing in the first place. While Michaels is indeed considered a New Historicist, the article in itself is at least ambiguous: 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 as an undergraduate student.
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 monhrose running text. Overall, it seems as though Montrose is regarded as an example of the New Historicist practice.
Louis Montrose – Wikipedia
These texts are the following: We have a redefinition of literature in the sense that is becomes part of social history, rather than art history. While Renaisssnce claims not to psychoanalyze, he does so anyway.
To mirror the structure of the previous parts of this thesis, the analysis will be divided into four subsections as well: Of interest here is how, not what, forces historical, social, economic, biographical, sexual, aesthetic, psychological, and so on interact with these productions and interpretive practices.
In his survey fromH. University of Chicago Press, Stephen Greenblatt offers a working definition, which Dollimore adopts in his work: 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.
As Stephen Greenblatt points out, what was really worrying for the Queen was both the repeatability of the representation – and hence the multiplying numbers of people witnessing it – and the locations of these repetitions: 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. Each of these had to be divided into two aspects: While this seems like an obvious part of literary criticism, it remains mainly undefined in all seven texts.
The possibilities for action are always socially and historically situated, always limited and limiting.
Perhaps Montrose, identifying himself as a New Historicist, has a different approach to certain aspects of these poetics. However, as pointed out earlier, the New Historicism inherently occupies itself with the diachronic aspect as well. Yet, my reader will have to wait a little longer in order to discover what this could be — all will be revealed in due course — because there are some people I would like to thank first.
The outcome may completely dismantle the idea in itself, or help sustain it in its current form. In that sense, Veeser Together with other remnants, relics and vestiges of the past, they craft a social context anthropologically.
I hope that my thesis provides an answer to a yet unexplored question within the existing research on the New Historicism. New York and London: Edinburgh University Press,