"Re-fashioning" History And Literature:A Study Of Stephen Greenblatt’s New Historicist Practice

Originating in the early 1980s.the New historicism was founded by the American literary critic Stephen Greenblatt.whose main research object was literary works in Renaissance England.Greenblatt’s new historicism is a kind of critical practice,of which the most important purpose is to "re-fashion" the historical reality of Renaissance England on the one hand and to "re-interpret" the English literary works of that period.With "Greenblatt’s New Historicism criticism is a kind of "’re-fashioning’ practice" as its thesis.this dissertation re-examines this critical approach by focusing on Greenblatt’s rich and novel critical cases,trying to present a different Greenblatt and New Historicism.Greenblatt’s New Historicism takes as its theoretical premise the definition of"culture" by American cultural anthropologist Clifford Geertz.According to Geertz and Greenblatt.culture is a system of signs of which the meaning needs to be explained.and the task of anthropologists and literary critics is to construct it in an elaborate and intensive manner.In this process,the alleged "truth" gradually shows itself.This approach is called "thick description" by Geertz.Geertz advocates a "one-way thick description".constructing the possible meaning of the semiotic system of culture by interpreting specific cultural phenomena.Greenblatt,however,develops a "two-way thick description".On the one hand,a non-literary text is used to "thickly describe" a literary text so as to construct a new possibility of textual meaning.On the other hand.a literary text is used to "thickly describe" non-literary text so as to construct a new possibility of "historical truth".Greenblatt regards culture as a dynamic mechanism of"constraint" and "mobility",and the purpose of his "cultural poetics" is to "re-fashion"this dynamic mechanism in Renaissance England,and to "re-interpret" the meaning of literary texts in the process of "re-fashioning".Greenblatt’s New Historicist "’re-fashioning’ practice" operates by two rhetorical devices:synecdoche and chiasmus."Synecdoche" is the means by which Greenblatt sees the big from the small.That is,he tends to "close read" a trivial and insignificant text,and then to "re-fashion" broader historical reality based on that "close reading"."Chiasmus" refers to the case in which the two parts that constitute a sentence share the same structure but are in reverse order.For Greenblatt.one can explore history by reading literary works on the one hand and can interpret literary works by referring to historical texts.The main function of "chiasmus" is to help Greenblatt "re-interpret"the meaning of literary texts by means of "juxtaposition".Both "synecdoche" and"chiasmus" lead to construction.In synecdoche,where parts represent the whole,some elements risk being marginalized or even unseen for not being "represented".The same is true of "chiasmus".There is no guarantee that literature and history will inevitably be governed by a consistent cultural pattern.Ultimately,both rhetorical operations bring about nothing but the "re-fashioning" of historical reality and the "re-interpretation"of textual meaning.Greenblatt’s New Historicist "‘re-fashioning’practice" follows a basic procedure:"wonder-resonance-wonder."Wonder" means that literary and artistic works can arouse people’s strong feelings and prompt people to explore the causes of such feelings."Resonance" means that the meaning of literary and artistic works is generated by their constant touches and "interactions" with the surroundings.making it possible for the same literary or artistic work to mean different things in different contexts.Greenblatt’s New Historicism is unique in three ways.First.it greatly enriches the connotation of the two.transforming them from pure aesthetic terms to ideological ones.Second.Greenblatt keeps them in check and maintains a delicate balance between the two.Third.it accurately represents the operation procedures of New Historicisin.A typical New Historicist reading begins with "wonder"(raising the question),proceeds by "resonance"(answering the question)and ends with yet another "wonder"(an indeterminate conclusion).By applying "wonder" and "resonance" to his practice.Greenblatt is engaged in a constructive activity,forging bonds between different texts("resonance"’)on the one hand and conjuring "wonder" on the other.Greenblatt "re-fashioned"Renaissance into an era where individual will and identity were ruthlessly suppressed.For Greenblatt,Renaissance by no means manifests the beginning of humanism and the emancipation of human nature.Rather,Renaissance people were,according to Greenblatt."fashioned" by various institutions,forcing them to maintain their existence through hypocrisy and theatricality.Greenblatt’s "refashioning" of Renaissance is based not on extensively collected historical data but on interpretation of various texts,including literary ones.This "re-fashioning" is a further elaboration of Louis Althusser’s theory of ideology.Greenblatt’s theory of "selffashioning" differs from Althusser’s "interpellation" in that the former is more complex than the latter and allows for more room of resistance and struggle.With construction of self as the common thread and by scrutinizing texts of almost all genres,Greenblatt’s"re-fashioning" of Renaissance is based on "close reading",a typical approach of New Critics.This suffices to illustrate that Greenblatt’s version of Renaissance is a New Historicist construct.Greenblatt’s New Historicism "re-fashioned" Shakespeare into a "Closet Catholic".His "re-fashioning" is a manifestation of his theory of "circulation of social energy".Greenblatt believes that all artifacts,including literature,are caught up in the"circulation of-social energy.”His "social energy" refers to the shaping power of artifacts to fashion people’s values and thoughts.The "circulation of social energy"refers to the transfer of "shaping power" from one social institution to another and its metamorphosis in historical development.According to Greenblatt.Shakespeare’s literary creation was engaged with the "circulation" of "purgatory" ’s social energy"from the church to the theater.His theory of "circulation of social energy" breaks the dogmatic binary opposition between text and context,re-examines the meaning of literary works by placing them in the "circulation" of "social energy" from one field or institution to another,thus constructing a different image of Shakespeare.Still,the"circulation of social energy" is nothing but a theoretical assumption by Greenblatt.Because of the paucity of archival records,Greenblatt’s "Shakespeare as a‘Closet Catholic’”is less a fact than a surmise.Dedicated to "re-fashioning" the relationship between the past and the present,New Historicism is an application and extension of Saussure’s "synchronic" study and Croce’s "presentist" philosophy of history to literary and cultural criticism.Greenblatt constantly "travels" between the texts from the past and those in the preset.On the one hand,he interprets the past texts from the perspectives and frame of reference of the present.On the other hand,he seeks enlightenment for the present through interpretation of past texts."Re-fashioned" in this way,different historical periods no longer follow a linear trajectory,but are studied by analogy,showing a striking affinity with each other.This practice of "re-fashioning" assumes that all history vibrates in the minds and writings of historians who live in the present.Thus,New Historicism,like history writing,is ultimately a reconstruction conditioned by the concerns of the present.According to Greenblatt’s New Historicism,culture is a system of signs of which the meaning needs to be explained,and history is a construct based on text interpretation.Following this assumption,it is only natural that the meaning of literature and the reality of history is open to the interpretation of New Historicists like Greenblatt.Such a theoretical assumption and logical premise is the only thing that makes Greenblatt’s practices valid.If,on the other hand,we assume that history is an objective past independent of texts and historians,then Greenblatt’s New Historicism is nothing more than wild speculation and its validity will be in serious jeopardy.