Why Has Theory Run Out of Steam?: A Reflection on Its Material and Institutional Factors

Foreign Literature Studies ›› 2021, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (5): 106-116.

• Frontiers of Literary Theory • Previous Articles Next Articles

Why Has Theory Run Out of Steam?: A Reflection on Its Material and Institutional Factors

Chen Houliang

Online:2021-10-25 Published:2021-10-28
About author:Chen Houliang is Professor of English at the Department of English, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Wuhan 430074, China), specializing in literary theories and British and American literature. Email: chenhouliang@hust.edu.cn
Supported by:
“Hot Topics in Contemporary Western Literary Theories against the Background of Post-Theory” (18BWW001) sponsored by the National Social Science Fund of China.

Abstract

Abstract: There have been a lot of discussions on the socio-political context of the rise of theory, whereas the impact on theory from the market-oriented high education has not garnered enough attention. The inception and development of theory are closely related to the material conditions provided by the Western academia, such as intellectual traditions, academic practices, economic conditions, and cultural atmosphere. Some theoretical developments seem to have been prompted by the internal evolution of a theory itself, but they may also be initiated by external and institutional factors. The development of theory is not simply an ideological relay among theorists because it occurs not only in the minds of theorists, but also in the academic institution in reality under the effect of many external factors. The institutionalization, marketization and overindulgence in technology are the main challenges for theory today.

Key words: the decline of theory, academic institution, social context, institutionalization

Chen Houliang. Why Has Theory Run Out of Steam?: A Reflection on Its Material and Institutional Factors[J]. Foreign Literature Studies, 2021, 43(5): 106-116.

References

[1] Barry, Peter.Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. Manchester UP, 2009.
[2] Bate, W. Jackson.“The Crisis in English Studies.” Harvard Magazine, vol. 85, no. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1982, pp. 46-53.
[3] Birns, Nicholas.Theory after Theory: An Intellectual History of Literary Theory from 1950 to the Early Twenty-First Century. Broadview Press, 2010.
[4] Booker, M. Keith.“The Critical condition of Literary Theory.” Papers on Language and Literature, vol. 26, no. 2, Spring 1990, pp. 89-298.
[5] Connor, Steven.Postmodernist Culture: An Introduction to Theories of the Contemporary. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 1997.
[6] Culler, Jonathan.Framing the Sign: Criticism and Its Institutions. U of Oklahoma P, 1988.
[7] Eagleton, Terry.Literary Theory: An Introduction. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2003.
[8] Fish, Stanley.Is There a Text in This Class?: The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Harvard UP, 1980.
[9] Graff, Gerald.Professing Literature: An Institutional History. The U of Chicago P, 2007.
[10] Guillory, John.Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation. The U of Chicago P, 1993.
[11] Martin, Wallace.“Literary Theory in/vs. the Classroom.” College Literature, vol. 9, no. 3, Fall 1982, pp. 174-91.
[12] McQuillan, Martin, et al. “The Joy of Theory.” Post-Theory: New Directions in Criticism, edited by Martin McQuillan, et al., Foreign Languages Teaching and Research Press, 2018, pp. xxv-xxxvi.
[13] Moraru, Christian.“Theory: The Mourning After.” Journal of Modern Literature, vol. 39, no. 3, Spring 2016, pp. 154-62.
[14] Nealon, Jeffrey.Post-Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Just-in-Time Capitalism. Stanford UP, 2012.
[15] Nelson, Cary.“Against English: Theory and the Limits of the Discipline.” Profession, vol. 11, no. 1, Dec. 1987, pp. 46-52.
[16] Rabaté, Jean-Michel.Crimes of the Future: Theory and Its Global Reproduction. Bloomsbury, 2014.
[17] Strickland, Ronald.“Curriculum Mortis: A Manifesto for Structural Change.” College Literature, vol. 21, no. 1, Feb. 1994, pp. 1-14.
[18] TuSmith, Bonnie. “Opening up Theory.” Modern Language Studies, vol. 26, no. 4, Autumn 1996, pp. 59-70.
[19] Williams, Jeffrey.“The Death of Deconstruction, the End of Theory, and Other Ominous Rumors.” Narrative, vol. 4, no. 1, Jan. 1996, pp. 17-35.
[20] ---. “Packaging Theory.” College English, vol. 56, no. 3, Mar. 1994, pp. 280-99.
[21] ---. “The Politics of Pedagogy and the Uses of Theory.” Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, vol. 19, no. 2/3, 1997, pp. 209-24.
[22] ---. “The Rise of the Theory Journal.” New Literary History, vol. 40, no. 4, Autumn 2009, pp. 683-702.
[23] 周宪:《文学理论、理论与后理论》,《文学评论》第39卷第5期,2008年10月,第82—87页.
[Zhou Xian. “Literary Theory, Theory and Post-Theory.” Literary Review, vol. 39, no. 5, Oct. 2008, pp. 82-87.]
[24] 朱刚:《批评理论的今天和明天:李奇教授访谈录》,《外国文学研究》第31卷第5期,2009年10月,第1—9页.
[Zhu Gang.“Theory Today and Tomorrow: An Interview with Vincent Leitch.” Foreign Literary Studies, vol. 31, no. 5, Oct. 2009, pp. 1-9.]

Why Has Theory Run Out of Steam?: A Reflection on Its Material and Institutional Factors

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments