Geoffrey Hartman: A Deconstructionist Beyond Deconstruction

Geoffrey H. Hartman (1929-), a foremost American proponent of literary deconstruction and an enormously respected scholar at Yale University, has produced an astonishing body of works, including more than twenty books and hundreds of essays. The entire range of Hartman's career as a scholar, which, according to the shift of his focuses, can mainly be divided into three, sometimes overlapping unavoidably, stages: the first stage of reevaluation of Romanticism (especially of William Wordsworth's poetry), the second stage of his role as a member of the "Yale School" with deconstruction, and his contributions to Holocaust studies and Judaic studies in the final stage. Based on such a systematic trace, this thesis tries to make his second-stage career as the focus to probe into the uniqueness of Hartman's deconstructive theory and his special position in the deconstructive camp.Chapter 1, as the foreshadowing of the next three, firstly gives an introduction of deconstruction and Jacques Derrida, and then examines Hartman's admiration towards and his inheritance of the Derridean and more conceptual form of deconstruction, especially the indeterminacy principle, as the foundation of his transcendence of deconstruction.The following three chapters are dedicated to explore into Hartman's transcendence of deconstruction in the way of comparison with other deconstructors, aiming at unfolding his high originality and individuality. Chapter 2 contributes to Hartman's original view on criticism as literature. Wrestling with the defensive partition of the critical and the creative spirit, Hartman tries to define the symbiosis or tangled relations of literature and literary commentary, and points out that essay is a unified genre of both. By so doing, he has enlarged the scope of criticism and defined literature in the broad sense. Furthermore, it unfolds his thorough and novel perspective in the acceptance of the principle of indeterminacy. Not only are the meaning and language uncertain and precarious, even different genres can transit or intercross each other. Chapter 3 dwells on Hartman's role of a believer as well as defender of the principles of humanism. On the one hand, Hartman emphasizes man's subjectivity by restoring the responsibility of both readers and authors. On the other hand, he criticizes the phenomenon of evading the reflection of history and emphasizes history research and ancient culture inheritance, calling for the return of value judgements. A careful study presented in chapter 4 shows that psychoanalysis has come to play an increasingly major role in Hartman's thinking. It has been elaborated with 4 subpoints: his pursuit of unmediated vision, emphasis on critic's psychology, his view on Freud's kaka-angelic mode of interpretation, and the wrestling with "interpretation as theft." Of all the subpoints, the interdependence of latecomers on the tradition or early comers is the point Hartman weighs most heavily.The above-mentioned points all boil down to humanism which leads Hartman away from the boa-deconstructors to a deconstructionist beyond deconstruction. "Beyond," that is because of the original duality of his deconstructive theory: both deconstructive and traditional. Hartman, to some extent, expands the range of deconstruction and applies it to the textual reading, and overcomes the trend of nihilism in deconstruction. He should be rightly taken as a unique critical thinker who needs to be understood on his own.Considering the fact that the research on Hartman still encounters a cold reception and the existing studies on Hartman seem to be extensive, fragmentary, and misunderstanding, it is hoped this thesis could contribute to the study of this "deconstructionist beyond deconstruction."...