Structuralism, as a literary theory, emerged in the early 20th century as a way to analyze and understand the underlying structures of literary works. It originated in the study of anthropology and linguistics but quickly spread to other fields, including literature. Structuralism is based on the idea that all cultural phenomena, including literature, can be understood as signs and symbols conveying meaning. It emphasizes the analysis of underlying structures, such as narrative and character, rather than the individual elements of a work. The theory has evolved and continues to be relevant in contemporary literary criticism.
This article aims to explore the historical evolution of structuralism in English literature. From its origins in the early 20th century to its current state, we will delve into the key figures, concepts, and literary works that have shaped the theory. We will begin by examining the emergence of structuralism in the early 20th century, outlining the key figures and concepts that defined it during this time. Next, we will delve into how structuralism evolved and expanded during the mid-to-late 20th century and explore the key figures and concepts that shaped it. Finally, we will look at how structuralism continues to influence contemporary literary criticism and examine some examples of modern literary works that are analyzed through the lens of structuralism.
This article aims to provide an informative and comprehensive overview of the evolution of structuralism in English literature. It is designed to be accessible to readers interested in literary theory but without prior knowledge of structuralism. By the end of this article, readers will have a deeper understanding of the key concepts, figures, and literary works that have shaped the theory and how it continues to shape our understanding of literature today.
Structuralism in the Early 20th Century
Structuralism in the early 20th century emerged as a way to analyze and understand the underlying structures of literary works. It originated in the study of anthropology and linguistics but quickly spread to other fields, including literature. The key figures of structuralism in the early 20th century were French anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss and Russian formalist Viktor Shklovsky.
Lévi-Strauss, a founder of structuralism, applied the structural method to anthropology. He believed that the structures of human society and culture could be understood by analyzing myths and folklore. He also emphasized the importance of understanding the underlying systems of myths rather than focusing on their surface-level content.
Shklovsky, a Russian formalist, was another critical figure of structuralism in the early 20th century. He emphasized the importance of understanding the underlying structures of literature rather than focusing on the surface-level content. He believed that literary works should be analyzed as a system of signs and symbols that convey meaning. He also introduced the concept of “defamiliarization,” which argues that the purpose of literature is to make the familiar strange, to create a sense of distance and estrangement that allows the reader to see the world in a new way.
Read More: The Use of Symbolism and Imagery in Modernist Literature
Some examples of literary works that were analyzed through the lens of structuralism in the early 20th century include James Joyce’s “Ulysses” and T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land.” These works were considered groundbreaking in their use of stream-of-consciousness narrative and fragmentation, which structuralists believed revealed deeper underlying structures. Additionally, the works of Shakespeare were also analyzed from a structuralist perspective. For instance, the play Hamlet was interpreted as a complex web of systems revealing the inner workings of the character’s psyche, motivations, and relationships between them.
Structuralism in the Mid-to-Late 20th Century
Structuralism in the mid-to-late 20th century evolved and expanded from its origins in the early 20th century. Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, and Michel Foucault grew and developed structuralism during this period.
Roland Barthes was a French literary critic and semiotician who expanded on the work of Lévi-Strauss and Shklovsky. He applied the structural method to literature, arguing that literary texts should be analyzed as signs and symbols that convey meaning. He also introduced the concept of “myth” as a way to understand how literary texts are used to reinforce dominant cultural ideologies. One of his most famous works is “Mythologies,” in which he analyzed various aspects of popular culture to reveal their hidden meanings.
Jacques Derrida was a French philosopher and literary critic who developed the concept of “deconstruction,” closely related to structuralism. He argued that the meaning of a text is not fixed and stable but is always in a state of flux and subject to multiple interpretations. He also challenged the idea of a fixed structure, arguing that the structures of literary texts are always in a state of constant change.
Michel Foucault was a French philosopher and historian who applied structuralism to studying history and power. He developed the concept of “discourse,” which refers to how knowledge is produced and disseminated. He argued that knowledge is not neutral but is shaped by power relations and that literary texts are part of a more extensive system of discourse that reinforces power relations.
Some examples of literary works that were analyzed through the lens of structuralism in the mid-to-late 20th century include Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot” and Vladimir Nabokov’s “Lolita.” These works were considered groundbreaking in their use of unconventional narrative structures and characters, which structuralists believed revealed deeper underlying structures. The works of Virginia Woolf and James Joyce were also analyzed from a structuralist perspective. For instance, the novel “To the Lighthouse” by Woolf was interpreted as a complex web of structures that reveal the inner workings of the character’s psyche, motivations, and relationships between them.
Structuralism in Contemporary Literary Criticism
Structuralism in contemporary literary criticism continues to shape our understanding of literature and its underlying structures. Structuralist approaches are still used to analyze literary works, but it has also been combined with other theories such as post-structuralism, feminist literary theory, and psychoanalytic theory.
Post-structuralism, which emerged in the 1970s, is a structuralism development that emphasizes language’s role in shaping meaning. It argues that meaning is not fixed and stable but is constantly in flux and subject to multiple interpretations. Post-structuralism also challenges the idea of a fixed structure, arguing that the structures of literary texts are always in a state of constant change.
Feminist literary theory, which emerged in the 1970s as well, uses structuralist approaches to analyze the representation of gender in literature. It argues that literature reinforces patriarchal power relations and that literary texts can be used to challenge these power relations.
Psychoanalytic theory, which emerged in the early 20th century, uses structuralist approaches to analyze the role of the unconscious in shaping meaning. It argues that the unconscious is a powerful force that shapes our thoughts, feelings, and behavior and that literary texts can be used to reveal the workings of the unconscious.
Some examples of contemporary literary works that are analyzed through the lens of structuralism include Margaret Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” and Toni Morrison’s “Beloved.” These works are considered ground-breaking in their use of unconventional narrative structures, quirky characters, and depiction of the power relations between genders and races, which structuralists believe reveal deeper underlying structures. The works of David Foster Wallace and Zadie Smith are also analyzed from a structuralist perspective. For instance, Wallace’s novel “Infinite Jest” was interpreted as a complex web of structures revealing the inner workings of the character’s psyche, motivations, and relationships.
