assignment 3

Andrew McCormick

ENGL 701: Graduate Methodology

Prof. Richter

18 October 2010

Assignment 4 (“Overwhelming Question”)

My Question(s)

            Firstly, can seeds of what many critics nowadays think of as postmodernism (as an artistic and especially literary lens) be encountered in different works of the Great Depression? Can we, now several decades into a time in which the “postmodern” is rather a given, in retrospective find elements of it in some of the fiction that emerged from this rather dire chapter of U.S. history, the 1930’s? Secondly, stemming from this, if indeed we can identify elements of the proto-postmodern in some works of this time period, are we primarily limited to certain kinds of depression-era fiction? That is, would the elements of an early, pre-emergent or emerging postmodernism be primarily, or for that matter only, encountered in a particular corner or corners of the fiction that emerged from the American 30’s? Or, would this phenomenon be limited to works written, say, in the first-person? The third-person? Would it be limited to certain writers? To a particular time within the 1930’s? Also related to the first, originally posed question (as to whether we can find seeds of the postmodern in 30’s depression literature), what would be the function(s) of this emerging, early postmodernism in relation to the political ideologies and discourses of the time? In particular, how might it operate in the portrayal of some of the especially impoverished or generally disenfranchised? Then, circling back to broader, philosophical questions, does the presence of the postmodern in this time period and the aforementioned themes in question necessarily stand to undermine politically charged messages or readings? Or, can one who has claimed to have identified and explored seeds of postmodernism in 1930’s depression-era fiction that portrays the disenfranchised, still stand on firm ground in asserting that there are political messages in the work? Or has one negated this possibility by positing the presence of postmodern tropes in the works in question?

            My interest in what would become these interrelated questions originated, as far as I can tell, with an examination of a 30’s short story by William Saroyan that I wrote a paper on a year or so ago. The criticism I read on the story, “The Daring Young Man on the Flying Trapeze,” seemed preoccupied, among other things, with just how to classify the author; one critic argued that he was a Romantic Existentialist, another viewed his work as fundamentally more naturalistic than modernist, while others considered him a late modernist stretching the edges of the modernist envelope, so to speak. One particular critic, the most recently published I was able to find at the time, reflected back on Saroyan’s work as belonging to that bridge, or that “ critical point of least convenience between the first wave of Modernism […] and that new wave of Postmodernism—Kerouac, most obviously—that he is shown to have influenced” (Locklin NP). This critic goes on to point out that Saroyan can be seen as “our contemporary” (in the 1990’s, the time the critic was writing) given his way of “eras[ing] boundaries.” This particular encounter with the disputes about Saroyan prompted me to write that essay on a postmodern reading of the short story (“Daring Young Man…”). Exploring theoretical readings and introduction-to-theory type books on postmodernism, I became more interested in general in the postmodern lens, especially as it stands to deny a wholeness of identity or essence and deny or complicate meta-narratives, and moreover to embrace rather than flee from, the identity-blurring madness that is the modern condition (as opposed to modernism, which some critics I have read argue to be nostalgic for the pre-modernism time, where things were more neatly lined up[1]).

            These were the seeds of my interest in the emergence of the proto-postmodern in earlier to mid-twentieth century literature (namely fiction), particularly that of the depression-era. Then, when I began searching databases this semester for publications on thirties, depression-era literature and modernism/postmodernism, the pivotal piece of scholarship I came across, which has thus far shaped, validated and given impetus to this interest, was T.V. Reed’s article arguing for the presence on “Postmodern Realism” in James Agee’s and Walker Evans’s interdisciplinary book on poor southern farmers, Let Us Now Praise Famous Men. As I discussed in the previous two assignments, Reed argues that although the term or concept of the postmodern, as we know it, was obviously not yet in usage in the 1930’s, much of what we now acknowledge as postmodern is undoubtedly at play in Agee’s prose and Evans’s photographs. So this article on Agee and Evans has definitely put me on my current path, which I have continued down by reading more about postmodernism itself. Along the way so far, I have consulted the two intro to theory books footnoted below, articles from Steven Connor’s Cambridge Companion to Postmodernism, and begun putting together

           

---

[1] Mary Klages in Literary Theory: A Guide for the Perplexed; also Peter Barry in Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory.

assignment 2

Andrew McCormick

ENGL 701: Graduate Methodology

Prof. Richter

October 2010

Assignment 2, pt. 2: Updated, Annotated Bibliography in Progress

Discussion

As I continue to explore the tentative question I posed in the previous part of this assignment, the direction I find my research primarily taking is a deeper exploration of postmodernism itself. If one is to examine the emergence of the proto-postmodern (as I am hoping to call it) in the literature of a certain era (in this case, the Great Depression), it would seem necessary to have a working definition of just what postmodernism is. And it probably goes without saying that of the many complex -isms out there, this one is notoriously hard to peg down or definitively characterize. But I wish to at least pursue this task—defining some tenets of postmodernism—as I continue reading primary texts, pieces of literature from the Great Depression, as well as criticism about this period in and outside of literary theory and scholarship.

To reiterate, my particular focus, as explained in some detail in the previous part of this assignment, was primarily inspired by T.V. Reed’s article on “Postmodern Realism” in Agee and Evans’s Let Us Now Praise Famous Men; Reed’s argument fueled my interest in what he and other writers I am exploring are describing as the delicate task required of texts representing poverty and class exploitation in the 30’s—to convey the injustice at hand while not defaulting to heavy-handed, overtly political tropes (i.e. proletarian novels). Reed explains how part of the widely perceived esoteric or abstruse quality in Agee’s prose (which arguably hurt its sales and reception at the time of publication and prevented it from being appreciated until the 60’s) owes to the text’s nuanced complexity—interdisciplinary, hard to classify in genre, and de-centering of its writer and readers—which works, Reed argues, to refuse the traditional simplification or objectification of the poor (and, by inference, its refusal to couch its portrayal of class exploitation in any meta- or grand narrative, hence the connection with postmodernism, presumably a la Lyotard).

            If I wish to pursue an examination of similarly postmodern seeds in texts of the Great Depression, ones which are decidedly prose-fiction, not a blurry and uncategorizable sub-genre, as Reed considers Let Us Now to be, I feel the need to examine some current and past ideas as to what postmodernism is, or at least of what it may be said to consist.

In pursuit of this goal, one useful text I have been reading parts of is The Cambridge Companion to Postmodernism, edited by Steven Connor. Its introduction and its chapter on “Postmodernism and Literature,” both by Connor, have given me what I think will prove some useful leads. To briefly discuss two particular texts which these chapters have discussed, I plan on reading some parts of Jean-Francois Lyotard’s The Postmodern Condition as well as Frederick Jameson’s Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Connor also mentions his own book, Postmodernist Culture, which could prove useful. I have also consulted, in addition to the previously mentioned accessible introduction to theory by Mary Klages, Peter Barry’s Beginning Theory, namely the chapters on post-structuralism and postmodernism.

And as mentioned in the previous installment of this assignment, Morris Dickstein’s recent book Dancing in the Dark: A Cultural History of the Great Depression is serving as a solid anchor and nice general point of reference on the time period; as I near its halfway point, I find myself having a broader understanding of the 30’s and how art and culture formed discourses in it. Namely, of great usefulness has been Dickstein’s discussion of the need for non-overtly political writers to comment on issues of class and poverty more subtly, given the heavy-handedly political tone established by the proletarian novelists and the resulting shadow into which all potentially class-concerned 30’s work found itself cast. This nicely contextualizes and further explains some of T.V. Reed’s points in his discussion of Agee and Evans. More broadly, this has given me a sharper awareness of one of the major discourses of the time.

Regarding sources outside of the discipline, I have also added to my tentative bibliography a very interesting and fairly recent sociology article by Janet Lee, arguing for “The Utility of a Strategic Postmodernism,” on which, more to come.

Finally, I have begun to move into my hit-list of primary texts (fiction itself), tackling the first of a number of 30’s novels which my research has pointed me towards, Henry Roth’s much celebrated Call It Sleep. Once I have finished this, I am likely to read some Erskine Caldwell, William Saroyan and, if time permits, the seminal Agee and Evans text. Some of Steinbeck’s novels and stories, namely ones discussed in Dickstein’s book, are also likely sources. And, as mentioned, William Saroyan’s stories are a likely source for analysis.

Citations and Annotations

Agee, James and Evans, Walker. Let Us Now Praise Famous Men. (1941). Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001. Print.

It will probably be later on in the process that I get to this one, but since it was, after all, Reed’s discussion of elements of the postmodern in this book that gave impetus to my interest in the emergence of the postmodern in 30’s fiction, I should probably read it to understand where Reed is coming from, not to mention that the text itself is widely considered an important piece of 30’s writing on poverty and class exploitation.

Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory, 2^nd ed. Manchester, UK: Manchester Univ. Press, 1995, 2002. Print.

            Discussed briefly above, this is another accessible intro to theory book whose chapter on postmodernism has been useful in helping me just generally conceptualize some widely held tenets of the movement or lens.

Caldwell, Erskine. Tobacco Road. (1932). Athens, Ga: Brown Thrasher Books, 1995. Print.

Not much to say about it yet, as I haven’t started reading it, but it is high on my hit-list. Dickstein’s discussion of this depression portrayal of impoverished tobacco farmers gives me the impression that it is a far less serious, layered and complex piece of literature than, say, Roth’s Call It Sleep; perhaps this contrast will prove fruitful for analysis.

Connor, Steven. “Introduction.” The Cambridge Companion to Postmodernism. Ed. Steven Connor. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004. Print. 1-19.

Connor, Steven. “Postmodernism and Literature.” The Cambridge Companion to Postmodernism. Ed. Steven Connor. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2004. Print. 62-81.

These readings by Steven Connor have helped me to expand my understanding of the concept of postmodernism. Some of Connor’s key points have helped me build upon my understanding of Reed’s assertions about Agee and Evans—among others, that the “attempt to remain responsive to the claims of the other [alienated or ostracized subject] without resorting to the violence of formalization [is what largely] characterizes postmodern ethics” (15). This coincides nicely with Reed’s claims about what Agee and Evans do in Let Us Now… and why these tropes are tenets of postmodernism, even though the term/concept (postmodern(ism)) did not formally exist yet. So encountering another author’s claim that one characteristic of postmodernism is a refusal to readily “formalize” those “others” being written about while still trying to represent them in ways that allow action/change, may help sharpen my focus as I read primary texts, giving me something to look for examples of (or examples of the absence of). Connor’s point, quoted above, also seems not just a little parallel to Lee’s interests in a “Strategic Postmodernism” for her discipline, sociology (see below).

Dickstein, Morris. Dancing in the Dark: A Cultural History of the Great Depression. New York: Norton, 2009. Print.

Already discussed above; a tremendously helpful, context-providing book. Of particular help so far: Dickstein’s analysis of Steinbeck, a possible writer for me to discuss in this project; Henry Roth, whose important book Call It Sleep, which I am currently reading, I was pointed to from Dickstein’s discussion of it early on in his book; and his analysis, although a bit different from Reed’s, of Agee and Evans. Most of all, of major interest to me at this point is Dickstein’s juxtaposition of truly proletarian novels—in which a regimented formula is followed, characters are rather one-dimensional, and the political meaning trumps and simplifies both form and content—with more subtle works, in which the disenfranchised are examined and explored as human beings, not offered up as mere cardboard cutouts that uphold a priori elements of the muck-racking novel.

Guttman, Allen. “Think Back on the Thirties.” The Massachusetts Review. 9.3 (Summer 1968): 605-611. JSTOR. Web. 22 Sept. 2010.

Briefly discussed in the previous installment, this article gives some useful historical context to the decade in question as it was perceived three or so decades later in the 1960’s. But this is probably one of my thinner sources so far; hence why I am still seeking more up-to-date, purely historical sources. Guttman’s discussion of American’s drift from infatuation with to fear and skepticism of communism is interesting and relevant background information.

Klages, Mary. Literary Theory: A Guide for the Perplexed. New York: Continuum, 2007. Print.

One of the more accessible introductions to theory I have read, this is of particular usefulness to me in this project and previous essays I have written; its chapter on postmodernism, especially its brief but direct explanation of Lyotard and the concept of the “meta-narrative” has helped me in considering one of postmodernism’s major raisons d’être and its relationship to literary analysis.

Lee, Janet. “The Utility of a Strategic Postmodernism.” Sociological Perspectives. 42.4 (1999): 739-753. JSTOR. 06 Oct. 2010. Web.

            A new and potentially interesting, cross-disciplinary source. In short, Lee talks about how of the many disciplines that have found themselves disrupted by postmodernism, sociology is especially ripe for discussion, and for some re-evaluation of the possibilities of compatibility between disciplines and postmodernism as a lens. Lee explains that traditionally, sociology has assumed and insisted upon the need to be empirical, to measure evidence and pose categories of identity, to presume a sense of agency comprised at least in part by common, lived experiences on the part of those being studied. This is especially so when it comes to disenfranchised groups—minorities, women, etc. For rather obvious reasons, Lee explains, postmodernism as a condition or a lens would seem, by its nature, to disrupt these things. But Lee offers some possibilities for a “strategic postmodernism.” Quoting another sociologist, Mike Featherstone, she offers that “there are…lessons to be learned from a postmodern sociology: it focuses attention on ways in which theories are built up, their hidden assumptions, and questions the theorist’s ability to speak for the ‘other’…” (740). This article seems potentially quite compatible with Reed’s discussion of Agee and Evans, and it is worth noting that one point Reed takes issue with is that the text (Let Us Now…) has been recently classed as a sociology book, which he says is problematic. More pressingly, though, it would seem to be precisely the inherent difficulty in “speak[ing] for the ‘other’” to which Featherstone (quoted by Lee) refers, with which Reed is concerned in the work of Agee and Evans.

Lyotard, Jean-Francois. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (1979). Trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1984. Print.

            One of the theoretical texts I will be hopefully reading to gain a deeper understanding of the lens/movement I will be exploring in depression era lit.

Reed, T.V. “Unimagined Existence and the Fiction of the Real: Postmodernist Realism in Let Us Now Praise Famous Men.” Representations. No. 24 (Fall 1988): 156-176. JSTOR. Web. 24 Sept. 2010.

This text I have already discussed quite a bit, so I won’t say more about it here.