Using a Critical Lens to View New Historicism and Cultural Criticism

This week I have begun to closely examine Lois Tyson's chapter entitled, "New Historical and Cultural Criticism." I will begin by defining new historical and cultural criticism in order to keep these two closely related concepts somewhat apart. Although often it may be necessary to keep new historical and cultural criticism together. New historians do not understand history ". . . simply as a linear progression of events" as traditional historians seem to do (Tyson, 2006, p. 283). New historical criticism is a using a different lens to look at history, which is quite different than how traditional historians look at history. New historians may ask questions like ". . . 'How has the event been interpreted?' and 'What do the interpretations tell us about the interpreters?'. . . "(Tyson, 2006, p. 282) as opposed to more traditional historians that may simply ask ". . . 'What happened?' and 'What does the event tell us about history?'. . . " (Tyson, 2006, p. 282).

New historians believe that readers/listeners are only getting a piece of history-the piece the author has chosen or was told to write or tell about to a particular audience. The piece of history that a particular author(s) felt was worthy of being told. This often leaves out some very important people and events as voices become marginalized. It seems that new historians are left wondering what else really went on, at whose expense, perhaps, and what impacts did the events have on ALL? In other words, what was the whole story, not just the 'cherry picked' details? Indeed new historians believe history should involve what Clifford Geertz refers to as "thick description" to not leave anybody out.

Cultural criticism is a belief that all should have a voice and that there should not be a hierarchy among those voices. All voices are equally important. The dominant class should not dictate what is considered valued. There is ". . . no meaningful distinction between 'high' and 'low' forms of culture" (Tyson, 2006, p. 296). Cultural critics also believe, ". . . a culture is a collection of interactive cultures, each of which is growing and changing, each of which is constituted at any given moment in time by the intersection of gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic class, occupation, and similar factors that contribute to the experience of its members" (Tyson, 2006, p. 296).

Keeping the ideas of new historical and cultural criticism in mind, imagine how differently you might read the next social studies or history textbook, especially within your own classroom. Think of how differently you may read the next piece of literature, especially ones that are portraying certain aspects of history, as in historical fiction or nonfiction that detail events. Are we really seeing the entire picture through our rosy colored glasses or are the lens slightly (or maybe totally) fogged up not allowing us to see how things really are?