April 23, 2007

Barker and Hulme...I just don't know what to say....

Just when I thought I had the hang of a cultural approach everything is blown out of the water. I understand where they are coming from when they say that The Tempest is just trying to show another way of approaching the colonialism issue, however what they are trying to do with con-text really confuses me. In one little section (Section III on 444-445) is the only place in the essay that they really focus on what they mean by con-text. They state:

These con-texts are the precondition of the plays' historical and political signification, although literary criticism has operated systematically to close down that signification by a continual process of occlusion.

And so I turned to my classmates for help in this matter.

The first classmate that I turned to was David because he is presenting on this matter. His entry made more sense to me than the original article did. He explained the essay in very clear and stated terms that helped me to understand what Barker and Hulme were trying to say. From that I now understand that the beginning of this essay was about showing how the other criticisms have pretty much brushed over historicism and paid it little heed. Also, David explained in more detail about how colonialism tied into Barker and Hulme's argument.

I don't really have much more to say other than I hope that the discussion on this essay helps me to understand it a bit better.

Barker and Hulme, ''Nymphs and Reapers Heavily Vanish'' -- Jerz EL312 (Literary Criticism)

Posted by Tiffany Brattina at April 23, 2007 4:20 PM | TrackBack
Post a comment

Remember personal info?