Notes on "What is theory ?" by Jonathan Culler
Notes on "What is theory ?" by Jonathan Culler
Philo-Lit
The term theory has a lot to do in various fields.
But what is this thing called theory? Seems like a big word
but in most cases it will be even less than a sort of activity.
In literature, we are told that theory has changed the
nature of literary studies- but this theory is not the literary theories (which
is the way of writing literature and the way it is analysed have changed.).
Instead they all have in mind another set of theories- when they complaint that
there is a lot of theories, they have a separate set of ideas and names in
mind- may be Derrida, Foucault, Spivak etc
The term theory
The term theory itself has problems
Seems like the term has got two directions
1.
Theory of relativity
2.
Ordinary use of the word ‘Theory’
The author shows an example and says:
Theory is more than a guess, a speculation, a kind of
explanation which is not obvious.
A theory is more than a hypothesis.
It is not easily confirmed or disproved.
Theory as a genre
Theory cannot be seen as account of literature or methods of
analysing literature.
It is a body of writing whose limits are hard to define.
The philosopher Richard Rory has spoken / given an
explanation for this:
He says that a new kind of writing has developed in the days
of Goethe and Macaulay which is neither the evaluation of the relative merits
of literary productions, nor intellectual history, nor moral philosophy, nor
social prophecy, but all of these mingled together in a new genre. This
miscellaneous genre got the nickname theory.
This is the simple explanation but this is unsatisfactory.
Still it seems to capture everything that happened in 1960s.
Therefore, theory is not a set of methods for literary study
but an unbounded group of writings about everything under the sun.
So, the genre ‘theory’ do not include just anything about literature, it may include
anthropology, philosophy, gender studies, linguistics, political theory,
psychoanalysis, social and intellectual history.
Theory’s effects
We know that the studying or reading theory make a little bit
of change in people’s view. But what sort of change?
The main effect is disputing of common sense. Theory
questions:
·
The idea that the meaning of a text is what the
speaker had in mind
·
The idea that writing is an expression whose
truth lies in a set of experience which it express.
·
The notion that reality is what is present at
the given moment
What does Theory do:
Theoy often critics the common sense notions.
·
Theory tries to convey us that what we take in
as the common sense is a historical construction.
·
It tries to convey whatever we see as common
sense is also a set of another theory which has become more and more natural to
us due to repetition.
·
Theory arises as something that questions the
most common assumptions that we are taking for granted.
The author then tries to show us some examples:
Foucault on the
concept ‘sex’
Michael Foucault- French Intellectual historian
In his book The History of Sexuality, he considers what he
calls ‘the repressive hypothesis’= sex is something that is throughout earlier
period as something repressed.
Foucault says that sex is a complex idea – this complexity
is produced through a range of practices, investigations, talk and writing-
discourses or discursive practices. It is also an idea talked by doctors ,
psychologist, moralists, social workers , politicians, etc---- This is thus
brought out as an idea which is present everywhere but present as a hidden
thing- therefore a secret to be discovered everywhere.
There is sexual intercourse which is biological. But 19th
c made it a concept which united many fields together – medical, moral, social,
psychology etc under this term. Thus 19th c created an artificial
unity. This process made sex or sexuality as something important in our life.
Also with this, according to Foucault, sexuality came associated with identity-
thus homosexuality started being treated atleast as ‘type of species’
Foucault has brought out an argument from the field of
history which became a theory.
Theory’s moves:
Theory often results in the thinking about other topics
associated with it.
For example, the theory of Foucault about sex lead to further theories and ideas of relationship
between sex and the social forces- whether they try to repress or bring out or
control anything that is related to sex or sexuality.- further- whether the
social forces (power) and natural sexuality is opposed with each other or what.
The answer of Foucault for these questions are that- this is
the pervasiveness of power. We all think that we are resisting power by
championing sex , but in fact we are working in terms with the power- we are
controlled by power.- And for Foucault, Power is not something that is clearly
evident or seen, Power produces Knowledge and what is being accepted as truth
or what is being spread as knowledge is a manipulated version set by people in
Power.
The theory of Foucault is not something for which you can
give evidence, but it is more than a guess. But of course it is a study and it
is in fact, an analytical study where in we may be able to find some evidences
that make us feel the hypothesis to be true/ or to agree with the hypothesis.
Moreover, even though Foucault does not mention about literature, this theory was useful for people
to stady gay relationship and lesbian literature as well.
Derrida
Second example that the author takes is the theory of
Derrida
Derrida-French philosopher
His analysis of the writings in Rousseau’s Confessions
Rousseau- French thinker.
Rousseau says that
writing is a supplement to speaking.
Derrida criticises it and says writing can never be
considered as a ‘supplement’. He cites the menaing of supplement as explained
in Webster. Derrida also says speaking itself is a supplement. Derrida
says this is the logic of supplementarity that he discovers in the works of
Rousseau. (that is, with Rousseau’s own theory and idea we can try to say
otherwise).
Rousseau says in the work the importance of his lover Madame
de Warens (he calls her ‘Maman’)
Rousseau says he often goes and hugs the bed, chair,
curtains etc which Maman kissed and touched so that he could feel her in her
absence. He missed her a lot. Thus supplements are important.
Derrida says supplements are important and when this
situation is studied, one can see that supplements are more important and
required in order to feel her absence- so that in turn- we feel that she was /
her presence was that important. Even when she is present, these signs and
supplements need around her to feel her presence and importance.
What we learn from these texts is that the idea of original
is created by copies.. (the relevance of lover Maman is created by the signs
and supplements during her absence)
According to Derrida, this is why for Rousseau supplements
are always necessary.
For Derrida, instead of thinking life as something to which
signs and texts are added to represent it, we should conceive of life itself as
suffused with signs. In a famous statement of Derrida, Derrida says ‘There is
no outside – of- text’.
What do these
examples show:
Though Derrida and
Foucault are poststructuralists, their theories are different. Foucault has
done a historical study and put forward his idea of the term ‘sex’. Derrida has
come up with his own interpretation of a text and by interpreting the text and
words in the text, he has tried to show how things inside the e=text itself can
be read in another way.
So to conclude what is theory? Four points have emerged:
1.
Theory is interdisciplinary- discourse with
effects outside an original discipline.
2.
Theory is analytical and speculative- an attempt
to work out what is involved in what we call sex or language or writing or
meaning or the subject.
3.
Theory is a critique sense, of concepts taken as
natural.
4.
Theory is reflexive, thinking about thinking,
enquiry into the categories we use in making sense of things , in literature
and in other discursive practices.
One thing we all should keep in mind is theory is not a set
of texts which you can write and finish. It cannot be mastered. It is not
something for which there is a boundary.
_____________________________________________________________________
Philo- Lit
Comments
Post a Comment